Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050316122704.04603bb0@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:49:05 +0100
To: Panagiotis Sikas <sikas@ics.forth.gr>
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
In-Reply-To: <42380898.1030905@ics.forth.gr>
References: <20050315110003.5AC5961BF4@eikenes.alvestrand.no>
	<0f3301c529f3$8e2f8d80$030aa8c0@DEWELL>
	<42380898.1030905@ics.forth.gr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Subject: Re: Distinguishing Greek and Greek
Precedence: list
Sender: ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no
Errors-To: ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no

Dear Panagiotis,
a few questions for my own general understanding:
1. how does this affect the Greek as spoken in various other communities 
round the world? and the "legal" Greek of Cyprus? If yes what is the 
European Community position concerning the resolution of such differences?

2. what is the status of the IDN Tables as far as Greek characters are 
concerned if you know this? My question covers the .gr and the .cy TLD but 
also other ccTLD which could have already included Greek local names? Who 
could be a good lingusitic authority to translate the existing TLDs in 
Greek equivalent abreviations as the work is currently 
underway/accomplished for Chinese, Arabic, Hebrew, Cyrilic, etc. ? Do you 
know how Greek will be supported in ".eu".

3. is there an existing icon traditionally used to indicate a page in Greek 
language other than a Greek or Cyprus flag?

4. would there be an ISO 3166, ISO 15924 and ISO 693 translation in Greek?

5. is there from real usage experience any homograph problem between Greek 
characters and Internet naming system (DNS, Handles, ONS, OID, etc.)?

6. There is an ambiguity we will try to address at the WG-ltru for the IETF 
and in other places for Gov. positions concerning the scope of the 
discussed tag to know if it is to qualify or to define the language. 
"Qualify" means that the reader is informed and must be able to understand 
the discrepancies and the language extensions/additions (words, grammar, 
semantic,etc.). "Define" means that the language version is the reference 
for pages, typsetters, word processors, optical readers, grammatical 
editors, etc. as specified in RFC 3066 and its proposed revision. A part 
from the problem created if the reference version does not encapsualte all 
the language legitimate versions, we have a problem of web service, OPES 
and interapplication interintelligbility and quality of service.

Do you think that the different Greek language versions considered in here 
have a problem if the tag defines rather than qualifies? You understand 
that as a CRC it makes us a major difference.

I thank you so much.
jfc

=====================================================
For your convenience:
Draft: 		http://www.inter-locale.com/ID/draft-ietf-ltru-registry-00.txt
Charter: 	http://ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
gmane: 	http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.ltru
If you were Bcced for information and not familliar with the IETF process:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2026.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2418.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3934.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3669.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3160.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoffman-taobis-02.txt
=====================================================
Jon Postel (RFC 1591): "The IANA is not in the business of deciding
what is and what is not a country. The selection of the ISO 3166 list
  as a basis for country code top-level domain names was made with
  the knowledge that ISO has a procedure for determining which
entities should be and should not be on that list."
=====================================================
Brian Carpenter (RFC 1958/3.2): "If there are several ways of doing the
same thing, choose one. If a previous design, in the Internet context
or elsewhere, has successfully solved the same problem, choose the
same solution unless there is a good technical reason not to.
Duplication of the same protocol functionality should be avoided as far as
possible, without of course using this argument to reject improvements."
=====================================================
It seems that what works for countries and ISO 3166 since 1978 should
apply to languages and to ISO 693.
=====================================================

_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages