Subject: [Ltru] Concrete text fixes (Re: I'm really confused by chinese in 3066bis)

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 11:55:27 -0700

http://www.inter-locale.com/ID/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-13.html

1. In one of the fragments Shawn cites, we have:

When labeling content that is unwritten (such as a recording of human
speech), the script subtag should not be used, even if the language is
customarily written in several scripts. Thus the subtitles to a movie might
use the tag "zh-cmn-Hant" (Chinese, Mandarin, Traditional script), but the
audio track for the same language would be tagged "zh-cmn".

The point in this text is not about macrolanguages or grandfathered tags (it
is in a section about the use of script subtags), so that just muddies the
issue for readers.

My suggested fix is:

When labeling content that is unwritten (such as a recording of human
speech), the script subtag should not be used, even if the language is
customarily written in several scripts. Thus the subtitles to a movie might
use the tag "uz-Arab" (Uzbek in Arabic script), but the audio track for the
same language should not be tagged "uz-Arab"; it should be tagged "uz". (The
tag "uz-Zxxx" can also be used where content is not written: Zxxx = "Code
for unwritten documents".)

The discussion of the treatment of macrolanguages is below that, starting at
"Some of the languages in the registry are labeled "macrolanguages" by ISO
639-3".

I've looked it over, and it does not seem unclear to me. If anyone has
concrete suggestions for additions or changed text, they should present
them.

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

---

From: Shawn Steele <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 09:12:50 -0700

I agree that this resolves my confusion with this text, and that its best to use an example that doesn't have the macrolanguage issue.

- Shawn
________________________________
From: [email-masked] [[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Mark Davis [[email-masked]]
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 11:55 AM
To: LTRU Working Group
Subject: [Ltru] Concrete text fixes (Re: I'm really confused by chinese in 3066bis)

When labeling content that is unwritten (such as a recording of human speech), the script subtag should not be used, even if the language is customarily written in several scripts. Thus the subtitles to a movie might use the tag "zh-cmn-Hant" (Chinese, Mandarin, Traditional script), but the audio track for the same language would be tagged "zh-cmn".

The point in this text is not about macrolanguages or grandfathered tags (it is in a section about the use of script subtags), so that just muddies the issue for readers.

My suggested fix is:

When labeling content that is unwritten (such as a recording of human speech), the script subtag should not be used, even if the language is customarily written in several scripts. Thus the subtitles to a movie might use the tag "uz-Arab" (Uzbek in Arabic script), but the audio track for the same language should not be tagged "uz-Arab"; it should be tagged "uz". (The tag "uz-Zxxx" can also be used where content is not written: Zxxx = "Code for unwritten documents".)

The discussion of the treatment of macrolanguages is below that, starting at "Some of the languages in the registry are labeled "macrolanguages" by ISO 639-3".

I've looked it over, and it does not seem unclear to me. If anyone has concrete suggestions for additions or changed text, they should present them.

Mark

---

From: "Phillips, Addison" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 13:12:21 -0700

Inserted with a few minor edits:

<t>When labeling content that is unwritten (such as a recording of human speech), the script subtag should not be used, even if the language is customarily written in several scripts. Thus the subtitles to a movie might use the tag "uz-Arab" (Uzbek, Arabic script), but the audio track for the same language would be tagged simply "uz". (The tag "uz-Zxxx" could also be used where content is not written, as the subtag 'Zxxx' represents the "Code for unwritten documents".)</t>

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Shawn Steele
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 9:13 AM
To: Mark Davis; LTRU Working Group
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Concrete text fixes (Re: I'm really confused by chinese in 3066bis)

- Shawn

My suggested fix is:

Mark

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 13:27:49 -0700

LGTM

On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Phillips, Addison <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> <t>When labeling content that is unwritten (such as a recording of human
> use the tag "uz-Arab" (Uzbek, Arabic script), but the audio track for the
> same language would be tagged simply "uz". (The tag "uz-Zxxx" could also be
> used where content is not written, as the subtag 'Zxxx' represents the "Code
> for unwritten documents".)</t>
>
>
>
> Addison Phillips
>
> *From:* [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] *On Behalf Of
> *Shawn Steele
> *Sent:* Monday, May 05, 2008 9:13 AM
> *To:* Mark Davis; LTRU Working Group
> *Subject:* Re: [Ltru] Concrete text fixes (Re: I'm really confused by
> chinese in 3066bis)
>
>
>
> I agree that this resolves my confusion with this text, and that its best
> to use an example that doesn't have the macrolanguage issue.
>
>
>
> - Shawn
>   ------------------------------
>
> *From:* [email-masked] [[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Mark
> Davis [[email-masked]]
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 04, 2008 11:55 AM
> *To:* LTRU Working Group
> *Subject:* [Ltru] Concrete text fixes (Re: I'm really confused by chinese
> in 3066bis)
>
> The point in this text is not about macrolanguages or grandfathered tags
> (it is in a section about the use of script subtags), so that just muddies
> the issue for readers.
>
> My suggested fix is:
>
> The discussion of the treatment of macrolanguages is below that, starting
> at "Some of the languages in the registry are labeled "macrolanguages" by
> ISO 639-3".
>

-- 
Mark

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 14:42:12 -0700

My complaint with this change is that the language scenario is not 
particularly relevant to the industry that text was aimed at. I also do 
not want to suggest that users use "zxxx" for audio language 
identification. That code is there as a last resort -- it should only be 
used when an application insists on a script and there isn't a relevant 
one. This scenario is significantly less likely than a required language 
field on audio-only content (zxx). Cataloging systems don't typically 
force a script on the user. Could we remove the last line? 

In the rest of the example: Change to "cmn-Hant" and "cmn" if you feel 
that strongly that the Chinese language situation is clear. There's not a 
whole lot of localization activity around Uzbek in my industry. The fact 
is, the working group does not agree on what to do in this scenario.

Using Uzbek gets you out of drawing attention to the flaw in the Chinese 
language situation. I request that we not change the example and provide 
guidance in this area for Mandarin Chinese as my analysis of industry data 
indicates this is a source of confusion and inconsistency. 

Regards,

Karen Broome
Metadata Systems Designer
Sony Pictures Entertainment
310.244.4384

> When labeling content that is unwritten (such as a recording of 
> human speech), the script subtag should not be used, even if the 
> language is customarily written in several scripts. Thus the 
> subtitles to a movie might use the tag "zh-cmn-Hant" (Chinese, 
> Mandarin, Traditional script), but the audio track for the same 
> language would be tagged "zh-cmn". 
> 
> The point in this text is not about macrolanguages or grandfathered 
> tags (it is in a section about the use of script subtags), so that 
> just muddies the issue for readers.
> 
> My suggested fix is:

> When labeling content that is unwritten (such as a recording of 
> human speech), the script subtag should not be used, even if the 
> language is customarily written in several scripts. Thus the 
> subtitles to a movie might use the tag "uz-Arab" (Uzbek in Arabic 
> script), but the audio track for the same language should not be 
> tagged "uz-Arab"; it should be tagged "uz". (The tag "uz-Zxxx" can 
> also be used where content is not written: Zxxx = "Code for 
> unwritten documents".)

> The discussion of the treatment of macrolanguages is below that, 
> starting at "Some of the languages in the registry are labeled 
> "macrolanguages" by ISO 639-3".
> 
> I've looked it over, and it does not seem unclear to me. If anyone 
> has concrete suggestions for additions or changed text, they should 
> present them.
> 
> Mark_______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> [email-masked]

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 15:02:07 -0700

> force a script on the user. Could we remove the last line?

I have no objection to qualifying the last sentence. It is true that

(The tag "uz-Zxxx" can also be used where content is not written: Zxxx =
"Code for unwritten documents".)

But I understand your concern that this should be done carefully. How about:

(The tag "uz-Zxxx" can also be used where content is not written: Zxxx =
"Code for unwritten documents". However, use of this tag can prevent
matching for queries using "uz' alone, depending on the system.)

> is, the working group does not agree on what to do in this scenario.

We clearly need to address the situation with Mandarin. But *this* point in
the document (look a the context for the paragraph) is the wrong place to do
that. The place to do that is below, where the topic is being discussed.