[Fwd]: Response to Mark's message]

[Addison Phillips [wM]]

> >Martin wrote:
>
> > >The only reasonable solution
> > > I see for this one is:
> > > 1) Define some format for describing the various conventions.
> >
> >Like RDF?
>
> I was more thinking about something like LDML
> (http://oss.software.ibm.com/cvs/icu/~checkout~/locale/locale_data
> _markup.ht
> ml).
>
> Of course, an RDF-based format might also do the job.

I draw a distinction between defining the options available and the ones
selected.

LDML is good for the former, but not very good for the latter. Mark's email
points out that one's "international context" may include different choices
depending on your application, some of which may not be locale data points
directly.

>
> > > 2) Reference that format by an URI.
> >
> >You mean an IRI, right? ;-)
>
> Of course :-).
>
>
> > > >When inferring these preferences from
> > > >RFC3066bis, you should xxxxxx.....
> > > >//------
> > >
> > > I think it doesn't work for RFC 3066bis to give such instructions.
> >
> >I think that xxxxx would not give instructions on what to map
> TO, but rather
> >how to map FROM 3066bis. That is, how to group items in the more complex
> >hierarchy of scripts and whatnot when interpreting; how to deal with
> >deprecated values (no-nyn -> nn); how to deal with i- and x- values; etc.
>
> Can you give some actual examples of what might go into these
> instructions?
> For dealing with i-, the only thing I can imagine is: go look at the
> registration, and map it to something similar in your platform if you
> have something similar, otherwise don't map it. But that seems obvious
> to me anyway.

The example from my last email is probably a good one. I would group script
with language to form an "atomic unit". That is:

    "zh{-aTag}{-Hant}{-aTag}" is always interpreted as "{zh-Hant}-otherTags"
    "If {zh-Hant} has no direct local representation, map to the nearest
Trad.Chinese language+region representation
    "If all else fails, try 'zh'" // I'm not sure about this last one!!

I've been mulling this over, but am not sure I understand all of the
ramifications yet.
>
Regards,

Addison