New draft submitted of 3066bis...
chris at w3.org
Tue Nov 2 19:16:14 CET 2004
On Tuesday, November 2, 2004, 6:15:45 PM, Ira wrote:
MI> I thoroughly agree with John Cowan below.
MI> In both RFC 1766 and the successor RFC 3066,
MI> the ABNF limits the values to using ALPHA
MI> or DIGIT (per RFC 2234).
MI> 'xml:lang' may or may not be broken in W3C
MI> specs. Not our problem.
MI> But RFC 3066 is a BCP (Best Current Practice),
MI> which is a normative statement of IETF policy.
MI> There's no question of 'advisory', as Chris
MI> Lilley reports hearsay of below.
Sorry I was unclear. This was related to xml:lang not RFC3066. Although,
since xml:lang is defined to take either an RFC3066 value or "" there
seems slim scope for ambiguity there.
MI> And there's no possibility (or utility) for
MI> ever extending the allowed characters in
MI> RFC 3066 or successor language tags.
MI> Case folding for ASCII _in_this_domain_
MI> is strictly locale independent.
That was what I had always assumed and, once that assumption was
challenged, wanted to make crystal clear.
MI> - Ira
MI> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
MI> Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
MI> PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
MI> phone: +1-906-494-2434
MI> email: imcdonald at sharplabs.com
MI> -----Original Message-----
MI> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no
MI> [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no]On Behalf Of John Cowan
MI> Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 11:40 AM
MI> To: Chris Lilley
MI> Cc: Martin Duerst; ietf-languages at alvestrand.no; mark at macchiato.com;
MI> Elliotte Harold; Norman Walsh; mark.davis at us.ibm.com
MI> Subject: Re: New draft submitted of 3066bis...
MI> Chris Lilley scripsit:
>> Right, that is my analysis also. However, it has been stated that
>> RFC3066 is advisory, and you can put any string you like as a value of
>> xml:lang. I think that is wrong too, and the XML spec clearly says
>> either an RFC3066(or successor) value, or "".
MI> Ah, I understand now. The plain language of the spec is to be ignored.
MI> "Fiddle, we know, is diddle; and diddle, we take it, is dee."
MI> --Swinburne (see
Chris Lilley mailto:chris at w3.org
Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
More information about the Ietf-languages