Subject: Re: [Ltru] sgn-tags with regions (was: Re: draft updated)

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:26:44 -0600

"Phillips, Addison" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> The subtag 'ase' will replace "sgn-US" as the (sub)tag meaning 
> "American Sign Language". You can then use region subtags with it as 
> needed. E.g. ase-US or sgn-ase-US (based on the current draft). Among 
> other things, it means that we don't need to do anything except 
> deprecate the grandfathered tag "sgn-US" (etc.)

Which, I hasten to add, draft-4645bis already does, not only in the 
replacement Registry contents but also in Section 2.5 of the prose.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Arvada, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

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

---

From: "Kent Karlsson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:58:55 +0200

> replacement Registry contents but also in Section 2.5 of the prose.

I still say that it is not even a possible interpretation of RFC 3066
to remove the region code in these cases, no matter how the sgn-* tags
were discussed at registration time.

The "US" part in "sgn-US" is and remains a region code, and the
appropriate target code (for Preferred-Value of the to-be-deprecated
tag sgn-US) should be "asl-US". "asl-CA" (e.g.) is simply not covered
with tags in the current LSR, along with 100+ other sign languages
(plus regional variants of those sign languages) that will be taggable
using 639-3 codes.

	/kent k

---

From: Peter Constable <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:57:11 -0700

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
> Kent Karlsson

> tag sgn-US) should be "asl-US".

I completely disagree.

Section 2.2 of RFC 3066 does imply that "US" in "sgn-US" derives is to be interpreted as in ISO 3166 -- i.e. 'USA'. But that section says nothing whatsoever as to how that impacts the interpretation of "sgn-US" as a whole.

While the tag "sgn-US" is "defined" by RFC 3066 in the sense of being sanctioned for use under the terms of that RFC, Section 3 of RFC 3066 indicates that such a tag can be registered to indicate the "definition" in the sense of the intended interpretation of the tag as a whole. The interpretation of the tag as a whole is made clear by the registration:

------------------
Name of requester          : Michael Everson
E-mail address of requester: everson&evertype.com
Tag to be registered       : sgn-US

English name of language   : American Sign Language

Native name of language (transcribed into ASCII): American Sign
Language, ASL

Reference to published description of the language (book or article):

Costello, Elaine. 1998. Random House Webster's American Sign Language
Dictionary. New York: Random House. ISBN 0-679-78011-4
------------------

To assume that "sgn-US" is synonymous with "ase-US" would imply one of two things, both of which are wrong:

- It would suggest that "sgn" is synonymous with "ase", which clearly is not the case.

- It would suggest that "sgn-US" be interpreted as "sgn-US" as "signed languages as used in the US". That could potentially mean a number of different languages, but that is definitely not the intent.

The fact that (e.g.) 'American Sign Language as used in Canada' is not covered in the current LSR does not in any way imply that your analysis is correct: that semantic is not covered because no tag was registered, and the currently registered tag does *not* have the analogous semantic of "American Sign Language as used in the USA", as is clear from the relevant record in the LSR:

Tag: sgn-US
Description: American Sign Language

Peter

---

From: Martin Duerst <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 16:05:46 +0900

[co-chair hat on]

I have seen various people express their support for
mapping sgn-us to ase, and as far as I understand, it
seems Kent is the only one supporting the mapping of
sgn-us to ase-us. Unless anybody has any new information
or changes his/her opinion, I would like to close this
issue, so that we can concentrate discussion on where
we still need it.

Regards,    Martin.

>(plus regional variants of those sign languages) that will be taggable

#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:[email-masked]