Timetable for action: May 31 is suggested
cowan at mercury.ccil.org
Wed May 28 00:50:27 CEST 2003
Michael Everson scripsit:
> I take umbrage at this.
Minister: It seems the Americans have taken umbrage.
P.M.: They have? ... Where the deuce is that?
> Yes, I had suggested that a long time ago. Apparently this will fail
> because current implementations want to conflate script within
> language tags.
In the same way that they already conflate spelling.
> The interaction with country codes has not been addressed, has it?
> EVEN IF THESE PARTICULAR PROPOSALS DON'T HAVE COUNTRY CODES IN THEM
> THE PROBLEM STILL EXISTS. As tag reviewer, I think it best that we
> decide what we want to do *before* certain tags are added.
I agree. I have a proposal, founded on Peter Constable's model, which
is upward compatible, handles the most important things first, and
is straightforward. To wit:
where LanguageProper may have internal structure so that the rule
"ISO 639 in the first part" is always respected, and SpellingSystem
is founded on ISO 3166-1 and possibly -2. Sign languages always excepted.
> James Seng: What is best? zh-Hans-SG? zh-SG-Hans? zh-guoyu-Hant-SG?
zh-hans-sg, zh-guoyu-hant-sg, but not zh-sg-hans.
> Etc. etc. etc. I want this question answered before I approve the
> kinds of tags proposed. I think I am RIGHT to insist on this.
I agree. But how do we get to rough consensus here?
> Mark's proposals have implications regarding other tag structures,
> and that is why I am not accepting them at present. Is this in any
> way unclear?
The trouble is that you are not rejecting them either. On the view
you state here, you should reject them promptly.
> But this will not work with, apparently, the software that Mark is
> using now; he needs to use language tags only to do what he needs to
He is not alone.
Henry S. Thompson said, / "Syntactic, structural, John Cowan
Value constraints we / Express on the fly." jcowan at reutershealth.com
Simon St. Laurent: "Your / Incomprehensible http://www.reutershealth.com
Abracadabralike / schemas must die!" http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
More information about the Ietf-languages