Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050409174024.03f97810@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 18:00:08 +0200
To: "Peter Constable" <petercon@microsoft.com>, <ltru@ietf.org>
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: registry should copy non-English fields
	fromISOdocuments
In-Reply-To: <F8ACB1B494D9734783AAB114D0CE68FE05977FFD@RED-MSG-52.redmon
	d.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <F8ACB1B494D9734783AAB114D0CE68FE05977FFD@RED-MSG-52.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: 
Precedence: list
Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org

At 14:58 09/04/2005, Peter Constable wrote:
> > 1. How do we distinguish the French names from the English ones?
> > (Other than by inspection)
>
>Let me add a third potential issue: When ISO 639-3 is initially
>published, and the RA has published the initial code table, there will
>not be French-language and English-language names for languages. There
>will simply be a "reference name" for each language. Over time, the RA
>may add documentation to list the names of languages in English, French
>and possibly other languages, but it won't happen from the outset.
>
>So...

This reference name is obviously not a medium term user acceptable 
solution. This is why the ISO 639-3 cannot be a final solution. And why we 
need a multi-language ontlogy.

> > 2. Do we include (require?)(allow?) French, English, or both for
> > future registrations that are not sourced from one of the ISO standards
> > (ie. variants)
>
>I suggest that you cannot *require* anything in this regard. Allowing
>is, of course, a different matter.

I am sorry, but we make _require_ a MUST and main languages a SHOULD. I do 
not think this is negotiable. To the countrary it will become a MUST for 
main languages and a SHOULD for every languages. Extended to icons.

BCP 047 describes a Best Practice. The discussed matter is hardly yet 
"common" since not yet agreed. What ISO does not do is of little interest 
when compared with common equal users needs and rights. Whatever their 
language, origin, script, culture, localisation, budget, intelligence, 
history. Within the limits of practicality I do not think we yet reached.

I fully understand this leads to changes in your vision, way of thinking 
and organizing, etc. but I do not think you can avoid it. Because either we 
will do it or other people will do it, because this is what people and 
processes need.

jfc




_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru