Subject: Re: [Ltru] Applicability Statement for the IANA registry established by 4646

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:48:58 -0600

I agree for the most part with Mark's suggested text, which maintains 
the spirit of brevity of Alexey's original text, but is not so 
exceedingly terse that it raises more questions than it answers.

I also agree with Kent's concern about introducing "backup languages" as 
a new term.  We in the WG understand what this means, but many readers 
will expect a formal explanation.  "Fallback" won't quite work either, 
since RFC 4647 uses this term to refer specifically to the tag you end 
up with when you start truncating subtags from the right.  I wonder if 
it would be possible, in this brief paragraph, to talk about the concept 
of the language(s) in which a user prefers to receive content, without 
having to introduce a new term for it.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, 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

---

From: "Phillips, Addison" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:10:36 -0700

> exceedingly terse that it raises more questions than it answers.

+1

> having to introduce a new term for it.

+1!

See my suggested revision for a stab at this.

Addison