LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION - GB

[Addison Phillips]

There is no upper limit on field length. Lines longer than 72 characters
wrap (are "folded") onto additional lines.

I don't have a problem with including comment fields per-se. My opposition
in this particular instance is based on the following:

I think that comments should be rare and informative for users of this
registry. I don't see this particular information as being particularly
useful in determining which subtag to use when identifying language (any
more than adding a list of which country codes are covered by "419" would,
for example).

Erik's example of tzinfo is what I would want to avoid (the comments there
are extremely lengthy, amusing anecdotes that are entirely of no use to
users).

Best Regards,

Addison

Addison Phillips
Internationalization Architect - Yahoo! Inc.

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Debbie Garside
> Sent: 2006?3?31? 12:08
> To: 'Erik van der Poel'
> Cc: ietf-languages at iana.org; 'Doug Ewell'
> Subject: RE: LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION - GB
> 
> 
> 
> Erik wrote:
> 
> > We don't have to make it as descriptive as the time zone database, but
> > we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water either, like the
> > newsletter does. There should be a happy medium between these 2
> > extremes, no?
> 
> Yes, and that is what I am trying to achieve by requesting this comment.
> I
> would like to extend the requested comment further, if permitted, to allow
> for the "real" information to be recorded.
> 
> Is there a field length constraint on the comments field Doug?
> 
> Debbie
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Erik van der Poel [mailto:erikv at google.com]
> > Sent: 31 March 2006 20:33
> > To: Debbie Garside
> > Cc: 'Doug Ewell'; ietf-languages at iana.org
> > Subject: Re: LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION - GB
> >
> > > This is the problem that I am trying to address with the "tools"
> > available
> > > within the registry. Ideally I would like to add a comment saying "as
> of
> > > 03/29/06 GB no longer includes the Channel Islands and Isle of Man see
> > GG JE
> > > IM".  This would, in my view, suffice.  But I don't think, having
> spoken
> > to
> > > Doug, that the registry is really designed to do this.  I think he is
> > right
> > > but I also think it is easier to have something updated or annotated
> > within
> > > the registry than it is to get the ISO cogs moving.
> >
> > I think it would be great if we decided to add short comments that
> > indicate the history. We can always come up with formal names for these
> > fields in future versions of BCP 47.
> >
> > We don't have to make it as descriptive as the time zone database, but
> > we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water either, like the
> > newsletter does. There should be a happy medium between these 2
> > extremes, no?
> >
> > ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tzdata2006b.tar.gz
> >
> > Erik
> >
> > ---------------------------
> >
> > Here is an excerpt from the TZ DB, for those who don't want to download
> > the above-mentioned file:
> >
> > # Brazil
> >
> > # From Paul Eggert (1993-11-18):
> > # The mayor of Rio recently attempted to change the time zone rules
> > # just in his city, in order to leave more summer time for the tourist
> > trade.
> > # The rule change lasted only part of the day;
> > # the federal government refused to follow the city's rules, and
> business
> > # was in a chaos, so the mayor backed down that afternoon.
> >
> > # From IATA SSIM (1996-02):
> > # _Only_ the following states in BR1 observe DST: Rio Grande do Sul
(RS),
> > # Santa Catarina (SC), Parana (PR), Sao Paulo (SP), Rio de Janeiro (RJ),
> > # Espirito Santo (ES), Minas Gerais (MG), Bahia (BA), Goias (GO),
> > # Distrito Federal (DF), Tocantins (TO), Sergipe [SE] and Alagoas [AL].
> > # [The last three states are new to this issue of the IATA SSIM.]
> >
> > # From Gwillim Law (1996-10-07):
> > # Geography, history (Tocantins was part of Goias until 1989), and other
> > # sources of time zone information lead me to believe that AL, SE, and
> > TO were
> > # always in BR1, and so the only change was whether or not they observed
> > DST....
> > # The earliest issue of the SSIM I have is 2/91.  Each issue from then
> > until
> > # 9/95 says that DST is observed only in the ten states I quoted from
> > 9/95,
> > # along with Mato Grosso (MT) and Mato Grosso do Sul (MS), which are in
> > BR2
> > # (UTC-4)....  The other two time zones given for Brazil are BR3, which
> is
> > # UTC-5, no DST, and applies only in the state of Acre (AC); and BR4,
> > which is
> > # UTC-2, and applies to Fernando de Noronha (formerly FN, but I believe
> > it's
> > # become part of the state of Pernambuco).  The boundary between BR1 and
> > BR2
> > # has never been clearly stated.  They've simply been called East and
> > West.
> > # However, some conclusions can be drawn from another IATA manual: the
> > Airline
> > # Coding Directory, which lists close to 400 airports in Brazil.  For
> each
> > # airport it gives a time zone which is coded to the SSIM.  From that
> > # information, I'm led to conclude that the states of Amapa (AP), Ceara
> > (CE),
> > # Maranhao (MA), Paraiba (PR), Pernambuco (PE), Piaui (PI), and Rio
> > Grande do
> > # Norte (RN), and the eastern part of Para (PA) are all in BR1 without
> > DST.
> >
> > # From Marcos Tadeu (1998-09-27):
> > # <a href="http://pcdsh01.on.br/verao1.html">
> > # Brazilian official page
> > # </a>
> >
> > # From Jesper Norgaard (2000-11-03):
> > # [For an official list of which regions in Brazil use which time zones,
> > see:]
> > # http://pcdsh01.on.br/Fusbr.htm
> > # http://pcdsh01.on.br/Fusbrhv.htm
> >
> > # From Celso Doria via David Madeo (2002-10-09):
> > # The reason for the delay this year has to do with elections in Brazil.
> > #
> > # Unlike in the United States, elections in Brazil are 100% computerized
> > and
> > # the results are known almost immediately.  Yesterday, it was the first
> > # round of the elections when 115 million Brazilians voted for
President,
> > # Governor, Senators, Federal Deputies, and State Deputies.  Nobody is
> > # counting (or re-counting) votes anymore and we know there will be a
> > second
> > # round for the Presidency and also for some Governors.  The 2nd round
> > will
> > # take place on October 27th.
> > #
> > # The reason why the DST will only begin November 3rd is that the
> > thousands
> > # of electoral machines used cannot have their time changed, and since
> the
> > # Constitution says the elections must begin at 8:00 AM and end at 5:00
> > PM,
> > # the Government decided to postpone DST, instead of changing the
> > Constitution
> > # (maybe, for the next elections, it will be possible to change the
> > clock)...
> >
> > # From Rodrigo Severo (2004-10-04):
> > # It's just the biannual change made necessary by the much hyped,
> > supposedly
> > # modern Brazilian eletronic voting machines which, apparently, can't
> deal
> > # with a time change between the first and the second rounds of the
> > elections.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages