Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050315203041.036b5090@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:47:22 +0100
To: "Addison Phillips" <addison.phillips@quest.com>,
	"Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, <ltru@ietf.org>
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: "Obsolete" region subtags
In-Reply-To: <634978A7DF025A40BFEF33EB191E13BC0A9F498B@irvmbxw01.quest.c
 om>
References: <634978A7DF025A40BFEF33EB191E13BC0A9F498B@irvmbxw01.quest.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 18:14 15/03/2005, Addison Phillips wrote:
>Allowing multiple subtags to mean the same thing, as Frank suggests below, 
>would be a problem. Many language tag processors that I know of are 
>implemented based solely on the values of the tags themselves, with no 
>external knowledge baked into them. The existence of a registry might 
>change that to some degree, but you'll still have many of what the draft 
>calls "well-formed" processors for which "GB" is just a token.

I question myself on this. The DNS is 22 years old, the mail older. I 
understand that one wants to be careful at not changing them too much - yet 
the market will change them if it solved the spam. IDNs are one year and a 
half old and several consider that one can still change or even kill them. 
As far as I understand, you refer to applications resulting from RFC 3066, 
and may be from its predecessor? So they are 3 to 7 years old? They most 
probably are browsers/aplications which have anyway to be updated to 
support IDNs (applications needing to check languages are likely to also 
use IDNs)?

We are going to have a lot of changes in the DNS in the coming month to 
support the local TLDs which are to be a must. The support of the Tables 
will probably be required at users level, for 3+LD consistency checks,etc. 
(even if not planned yet). Many other applications would probably want 
then  to use functions using country codes if they were available.

Microsoft always said they wanted to watch the market reaction before 
implementing the IDN support in the OS. This WG could consider user located 
functions to get and integrate the IANA cc table and updates . It could 
then use them. Would it not be better to start anew while there is still a 
"small" base (RFC 3066 is still here for them) rather than to continue for 
ever with an old system?

BTW I personally think the IDN Tables and other TLD infos (such as the 
lingual aliases of the TLDs) are part of the Locale,
jfc


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru