Subject: RE: [Ltru] Private Use Tags

From: "Peter Constable" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 09:36:02 -0700

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of
> Dylan N. Pierce

> It is, in fact, the locale ID. But it would be disingenuous to present
> that distinction as a significant difference. Effectively, the locale
ID
> /is/ a language ID "plus."

True, insofar as every locale has language as one of its constituent
properties. But I believe (as others here have heard me say) that there
is a definite difference. A language tag is a metadata element used to
declare attributes of content wrt language variety and written form, or
to request content according to those attributes; a locale ID is an API
parameter used to tailor software processes, or to tag resources used to
tailor those processes, wrt a variety of cultural parameters, some of
which pertain to language but others of which do not. Very often, the
information in a language tag is sufficient for use as a locale ID, but
not in the general case.

> According to Sun's own documentation, "The language argument is a
valid
> ISO Language Code. These codes are the lower-case, two-letter codes as
> defined by ISO-639....  The country argument is a valid ISO Country
> Code. These codes are the upper-case, two-letter codes as defined by
> ISO-3166." And its purpose is so that applications can decide in what
> language to serve the documents (in this case, UI output).

I haven't reviewed their implementation or documentation, but something
doesn't make sense here: if the purpose of these IDs is only to select
UI strings, then I wouldn't expect these IDs would ever need to include
a component for currency.

Peter Constable

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

---

From: "Dylan N. Pierce" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 12:29:25 -0500

[From Peter Constable:]

 > [I]f the purpose of these IDs is only to select
 > UI strings, then I wouldn't expect these IDs would ever need to
 > include a component for currency.

If the UI string includes a currency, a percent, a number with a decimal 
point or thousands separators, or regionally ambiguous language--any of 
the things that knowing what language something is written in helps us 
navigate--then it would need that information.

> A language tag is a metadata element used to

If this is true--and I believe that it is--then it speaks well to the 
topic under discussion. After all, if two things serve pretty much the 
same purpose, but one of them does /more/, then basically, you have a 
subclass. And that's exactly what we're looking at here: using a 
universal tag, and being able to have a section of it for your own 
private subclass. Again, this would get everyone back on the same page. 
After all, Sun didn't have to use ISO values; they could have invented 
their own private system from scratch. They didn't because (1) why 
duplicate work that's already done? and (2) those values /almost/--but 
not qute--were all they needed.

[From Addison Phillips:]

 > They are limited to Java internal usage (which creates problems when
 > negotiating the locale over the Internet--there is work underway at
 > W3C I18N Core Working Group on this problem, which is a separate
 > problem from the language tag problem).

So then tags with defined extensibility could additionally solve the 
problem of negotiating the locale over the Internet? That doesn't sound 
like a separate problem. It sounds like (and please forgive me; I'm not 
trying to make enemies) perhaps some organizational notions of 
conceptual purity--"This is language and this is not, this is our 
jurisdiction and this is not!"--is causing us to divide essentially one 
practical problem into several provincial miniproblems that are not 
being solved in terms of each other, as they should be.

But if this is the case--things are already in their boxes--then the 
question becomes, "Is it worth trying to argue outside the box?" The 
answer to that question is usually no, unless you're friends with the 
CEO. Or married to his daughter.

Dylan