Subject: [Ltru] draft-16 (editor's copy) posted...

From: "Phillips, Addison" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 13:50:09 -0700

All,

(editor hat ON)

I have just posted the editor's copy of draft-16 on inter-locale. Note that Mark and I did some typo-fixing. I also made some more changes to the Scope section per some messages on the thread that I had missed (about making individual the default value). Diff links are available. Check it out.

(editor hat OFF)

Co-chairs: does draft-15 represent the rough consensus position of the WG on the extlang mess?

Addison

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

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

---

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:32:18 -0400

> the WG on the extlang mess?

Reading -16 for -15:  IANACC, but I don't think we have consensus on
whether to deprecate zh-cmn for cmn and zh-yue for yue, or to deprecate
cmn for zh-cmn and yue for zh-yue.  -16 says the latter, I say the
former.  I think there is (reluctant) consensus on having both of them
and deprecating one.

I think we need another straw poll, and I propose this one to the chairs:

Plan 1:  Include both zh-cmn and cmn, and both zh-yue and yue, etc.,
but deprecate zh-cmn in favor of cmn and zh-yue in favor of yue, etc.

	A) I prefer this plan.
	B) I can live with this plan.
	C) I cannot live with this plan.

Plan 2:  Include both zh-cmn and cmn, and both zh-yue and yue, etc.,
but deprecate cmn in favor of zh-cmn and yue in favor of zh-yue, etc.

	A) I prefer this plan.
	B) I can live with this plan.
	C) I cannot live with this plan.

-- 
Híggledy-pìggledy / XML programmers            John Cowan
Try to escape those / I-eighteen-N woes;        http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Incontrovertibly / What we need more of is      [email-masked]
Unicode weenies and / François Yergeaus.
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: "Phillips, Addison" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:01:45 -0700

(editor hat OFF)

The text in draft-15/16 was created based on the text in the various email threads. I don't recall seeing one from you advocating the other direction of deprecation, but that may be faulty memory on my part. I think that the direction doesn't matter as much as the fact of deprecation.

My vote on your straw poll would be 1:A 2:B because I think that xx-yyy => yyy is easier to explain, understand, adapt to my existing systems, and process.

Addison

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:13:59 +0200

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 01:50:09PM -0700,
 Phillips, Addison <[email-masked]> wrote 
 a message of 23 lines which said:

> I have just posted the editor's copy of draft-16 on inter-locale. 

One editorial issue, I do not find a clear link between "Extended
language subtag" and "extlang". A "clean slate" reader may spend some
time before discovering it is the same thing.

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:16:07 +0200

> I have just posted the editor's copy of draft-16 on inter-locale. 

extlang       = "-" 3ALPHA             ; selected ISO 639 codes
                *2[ "-" 3ALPHA]        ; permanently reserved

Why adding the second term to the ABNF at all, since the later text
prevents more than one extlang? In drafts -10 to -14, we removed the
extlang production (thus making formerly wellformed but invalid tags
not wellformed). Why not only the first term, "-" 3ALPHA ?
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:41:34 -0400

> not wellformed). Why not only the first term, "-" 3ALPHA ?

It gives last-call reviewers, who hate backward incompatibilities
no matter how theoretical, one fewer thing to howl about.  Consider it
a backward-compatibility wart.

-- 
You're a brave man! Go and break through the            John Cowan
lines, and remember while you're out there              [email-masked]
risking life and limb through shot and shell,           http://ccil.org/~cowan
we'll be in here thinking what a sucker you are!
        --Rufus T. Firefly
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru