Subject: [Ltru] updated editor's copy to deal with 'mis', etc.

From: Addison Phillips <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:22:23 +0100

All,

I have posted an updated editor's copy (draft-05) to my web site 
incorporating my proposed text to deal with the 'mis' mess. I haven't 
submitted it yet (I still need to run the various tools on it, etc.).

   http://www.inter-locale.com/ID/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-05.txt
   http://www.inter-locale.com/ID/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-05.html
   http://www.inter-locale.com/ID/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-05.xml
   http://tinyurl.com/2kctcy  (wdiff)

In particular, it differs from my informal proposal as follows:

1. Some minor wordsmithing to deal with Mark's observations about my use 
of "cannot be determined" wrt the 'und' subtag.

2. Some additions to allow the use of 'und', etc. as a prefix when the 
additional information is useful.

3. The addition of "i-default" to the list of items deal with (per John 
Cowan).

4. The addition of the MARC 21 reference. I also took the examples for 
'zxx' from MARC 21's equivalent code (which is three spaces). Note that 
this includes Frank's desire to allow program source code to be 
identified (although the text obliquely uses the phrase "machine language").

Here is the resulting text:

--
    5.  [ISO639-2] has defined several codes included in the subtag
        registry that have special meaning in the context of a language
        tag.  In cases where omitting the language tag is permitted, such
        omission preferable to using these codes.  Language tags SHOULD
        NOT incorporate these subtags as a prefix, unless the additional
        information conveys some value to the application.

        1.  The 'mul' (Multiple) primary language subtag is used to
            identify content in multiple languages.  It SHOULD NOT be
            used when a list of languages (such as Content-Language) or
            individual tags for each content element can be used instead.

        2.  The "und' (Undetermined) primary language subtag is used to
            identify linguistic content whose language is not known.  It
            SHOULD NOT be used unless a language tag is required and
            language information is not available or cannot be
            determined.  Omitting the language tag (where permitted) is
            preferred.  The 'und' subtag MAY be useful for protocols that
            require a language tag to be provided.  The 'und' subtag MAY
            also be useful when matching language tags in certain
            situations.

        3.  The 'zxx' (Non-Linguistic) primary language subtag is used to
            identify content that has no language.  Some examples might
            include instrumental or electronic music; sound recordings
            consisting of nonverbal sounds; audiovisual materials with no
            narration, printed titles, or subtitles; machine-readable
            data files consisting of machine languages or character
            codes.  It SHOULD NOT be used unless a language tag is
            required by some application or protocol and the content is
            non-linguistic.

        4.  The 'mis' (Miscellaneous) primary language subtag is used to
            identify linguistic content whose language is known but
            cannot otherwise be identified.  It is commonly used when the
            range of language tags is constrained (for example, to the
            set defined for use in the [MARC21] standard, for example) or
            for languages not otherwise categorized.  It SHOULD NOT be
            used unless a language tag is required and no other means of
            identifying the language is available.

        5.  The grandfathered tag "i-default" (Default Language) was
            originally registered according to [RFC1766] to meet the
            needs of [RFC2277].  It is used to indicate not a specific
            language, but rather, it identifies the condition or content
            used where the language preferences of the user cannot be
            established.  It SHOULD NOT be used except as a means of
            labeling the default content for applications or protocols
            that require default language content to be labeled with that
            specific tag.  It MAY also be used by an application or
            protocol to identify when the default language content is
            being returned.

--

Comments?

Addison

-- 
Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 10:16:11 -0700

I think this is the right direction. Some suggested changes below.

On 4/22/07, Addison Phillips <[email-masked]> wrote:
>             identify linguistic content whose language is not known.

=> whose linguistic status is not expressed: it may contain no linguistic
content, or content in one or more languages.

 It
>             require a language tag to be provided.

Add: or where a primary subtag is required, such as "und-Latn".

The 'und' subtag MAY
>             codes.

Add: or programming language source code. Note: where there are fragments of
linguistic content, such as programming contents written in English, the tag
zxx may still be used to indicate the primary status of the content, just as
"en" can be applied to text that may contain some French words as well.

It SHOULD NOT be used unless a language tag is
>             required by some application or protocol and the content is

Remove this SHOULD NOT, since it is already covered by the blanket
prohibition.

Add here (and renumber).

3a. Certain primary language subtags are distinguished as collections, such
as Germanic ("ger") or Algonquian languages ("alg") . For stability, these
codes are interpreted inclusively, thus content that is "en" or "de" or
"gsw" is also "ger". However, content SHOULD NOT be tagged with collections
unless the more specific information as to the language is not known.
Queries SHOULD NOT use collections to indicate a request for content in any
of the languages they encompass, unless the matching software handles them
in that way rather than just as literal matches.

[We may want to put a note on Queries on the other items as well, for
clarity.]

is a special collection code used to

>             cannot otherwise be identified.

It is commonly used when the
>             for languages not otherwise categorized.

I think the first sentence is sufficient, and we could drop the sentence
containing MARC21. But I don't feel strongly.

It SHOULD NOT be

-- 
Mark

---

From: "Kent Karlsson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 20:53:04 +0200

I largely agree with Mark's edits (though as I said, I'm flexible
as the deprecation/use of collection codes, as long as all
collection codes are treated the same).

Some comments below.

	
> 3a. Certain primary language subtags are distinguished
> as collections, such as Germanic ("ger") or Algonquian

'ger' -> 'gem'

> languages ("alg") . For stability, these codes are interpreted
> inclusively, thus content that is "en" or "de" or "gsw" is also "ger".

"'ger'." -> "'gem', 'ine', and 'mis'."

> However, content SHOULD NOT be tagged with collections unless the

"collections" -> "a collection code"

> more specific information as to the language is not known. Queries
> SHOULD NOT use collections to indicate a request for content in
> any of the languages they encompass, unless the matching software
> handles them in that way rather than just as literal matches. 

> is a special collection code used to

Remove "special" (which is incorrect), or replace "special" by
"top level" or similar. I don't mind an extra explanation (as long
as it does not try to treat 'mis' differently from the other
collection codes).

> cannot otherwise be identified. 

I would prefer to have much shortened "4." merged into "3a.".
I think it would actually be sufficient to remove "4.",
and just have  "'ger'." -> "'gem', 'ine', and 'mis'."  in "3a.".

		/kent k

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:44:05 -0700

> > as collections, such as Germanic ("ger") or Algonquian

Good catch, I missed that.

> "'ger'." -> "'gem', 'ine', and 'mis'."

ok, although on rereading it, they should be spelled out for ease of
reading. So

=>
inclusively, thus content that is English ("en") or German ("de") or Swiss
German ("gsw")
is also Germanic ("gem"), and Indo-European ("ine") and Miscellaneous
("mis").

> "collections" -> "a collection code"

ok

> as it does not try to treat 'mis' differently from the other

I don't see a need to change from "special", which tells the user that there
is something particular about it, and there is.

> and just have  "'ger'." -> "'gem', 'ine', and 'mis'."  in "3a.".

I disagree. I think "mis" is sufficiently different as to be worth calling
out for clarity. But I care more about the text than the numbering,.

                /kent k

---

From: "Kent Karlsson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:51:44 +0200

Ok, except for one thing:
 
 Mark Davis wrote:

> I don't see a need to change from "special", which tells the user
> that there is something particular about it, and there is. 

In plain English, yes. But "special" is used in a technical meaning 
in 639: only 'mul', 'und', and now 'zxx' are "special codes". 'mis' 
is not special in that sense, and "special collection code" seem to 
mix the concepts. Ok, one could say that "'mis' is a special case 
among the collection codes" without any greater fear that that is 
misread. Though what is special about it is that it is top level...
 
        /kent k

---

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:29:19 -0400

Kent Karlsson scripsit:

> misread. 

+1

-- 
But you, Wormtongue, you have done what you could for your true master.  Some
reward you have earned at least.  Yet Saruman is apt to overlook his bargains.
I should advise you to go quickly and remind him, lest he forget your faithful
service.  --Gandalf             John Cowan <[email-masked]>

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:35:04 -0700

ok, beaten into submission. How about:

4.  The 'mis' (Miscellaneous) primary language subtag
is a particular collection code used to

Mark

---

From: Marion Gunn <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 11:09:49 +0000

Whether "special" or "top level" is used, such words are ambiguous in  
English the extent that the relevant term(s) needs to be included in  
the list of definitions, I believe.
mg

> misread. Though what is special about it is that it is top level...

- -
Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991)
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn, Baile an
Bhóthair, Co. Átha Cliath, Éire.
* [email-masked] * [email-masked] *

---

From: "Kent Karlsson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 19:09:12 +0200

Mark Davis
> [...] How about:
 
I have no objection to that.
 
    /kent k