Subject: [Ltru] 2nd WG last call: singletons don't match

From: Martin Duerst <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 19:24:34 +0900

This is the only last call comment that I have that is potentially
substantive:

In section 3.3.2, Extended Filtering, point D says:

        D.  Else, if the language tag's subtag is a "singleton" (a single
            letter or digit, which includes the private-use subtag 'x')
            the match fails.

The way I understand this, this makes it impossible e.g. to
match the language range "en-US-x-private" to the language tag
"en-US-x-private".

In my recollection, this was different even just as late as the
previous draft (-11).

My questions here:

Is my interpretation of the current text correct?

Is my recollection of the state in -11 and earlier correct?

If the answer to both questions above is yes, then do we really
want things to work this way?

Regards,    Martin. 

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

---

From: "Addison Phillips" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 06:20:06 -0700

Your interpretation of the text is wrong. Rule C says:

"Else, if the current subtag in the range's list matches the current subtag
in the language tag's list, move to the next subtag in both lists and
continue with the loop."

This means that ranges "en-US-x-private" and "en-x-private" both match the
tag "en-US-x-private", but prevents the range "en-US-private" from matching
"en-US-x-private" (private has a different semantic meaning there).

Addison

Addison Phillips
Internationalization Architect - Yahoo! Inc.

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature. 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Duerst [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 2006?5?16? 3:25
> To: LTRU Working Group
> Subject: [Ltru] 2nd WG last call: singletons don't match
>