Return-Path: Received: from murder ([unix socket]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Cyrus v2.2.8-Mandrake-RPM-2.2.8-4.2.101mdk) with LMTPA; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 21:47:31 +0200 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41F4661B4D for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 21:47:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28675-02 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 21:47:26 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.4.8 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1759A61B75 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 21:47:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DptNo-00011t-OW; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:47:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DpeIz-00033d-IQ for ltru@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2005 23:41:05 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA06623 for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2005 23:41:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from montage.altserver.com ([63.247.74.122]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Dpeje-0008VD-DF for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 00:08:41 -0400 Received: from ver78-2-82-241-91-24.fbx.proxad.net ([82.241.91.24] helo=jfc.afrac.org) by montage.altserver.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1DpeIn-0006Fd-5H; Mon, 04 Jul 2005 20:40:53 -0700 Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050704182959.04ead220@mail.afrac.org> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2 Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 05:40:47 +0200 To: "Addison Phillips" , "Marion Gunn" From: r&d afrac Subject: RE: [Ltru] Referencing the Scheme within the Tag In-Reply-To: <634978A7DF025A40BFEF33EB191E13BC0C014577@irvmbxw01.quest.c om> References: <634978A7DF025A40BFEF33EB191E13BC0C014577@irvmbxw01.quest.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - montage.altserver.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - afrac.org X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:46:58 -0400 Cc: ltru@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at alvestrand.no Dear Marion, multilingualisation is a top priority of the WGIG. We will therefore most probably extensively discuss it through the coming months. For the reasons Addison gives and I documented in another mail, RFC 3066 will probably stay around until replaced by BCP 47 documenting the Multilingual Internet Framework or the MGN (Multilingual Global NGN). This is why we will keep http://rfc3066.org active and will document the various schemes (RFC 3066, "RFC 3066bis" and "RFC 3066ter" if they are published, x-tags, etc.). Once the issue stabilised, the site will be transfered to the CRC conference for a community management/ jfc At 18:10 04/07/2005, Addison Phillips wrote: >Okay, here's the main problem: we can't put a notation where you want it >and have valid ABNF. "Language-Tag" is not just some string. It is an >identifier. > >Secondly, the whole document should be referenced, not just the ABNF >(which will rarely be referenced). RFC numbers are not reused: it is their >sole advantage. Referencing RFC3066bis is a permanent way to say which >scheme you are using and will remain a useful reference even when there is >a "3066ter". > >Finally, there is a section in the document (2.2.9) that defines >conformance. This proposal belongs in that section. > >I'm not opposed to this minor adjustment, but I don't think it is practical. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru