[Ltru] Prefix bug
addison at yahoo-inc.com
Wed Aug 30 06:03:04 CEST 2006
Prefixes for variants are NOT required (there is a strong SHOULD and
multiple suggestions that a variant without a prefix is a Bad Idea). As
Mark notes, once registered without a prefix, registering *any* prefix
will break any and all (non-prefix-bearing) tags. However, the stability
prohibition on narrowing the meaning would seem to be in force.
John Cowan wrote:
> #4 does not say that the modification must broaden the set of *valid*
> prefixes, simply the set of prefixes (i.e. the set of prefixes mentioned
> in the record).
> What *is* discrepant is that nothing in 3066bis prevents a tagger
> from using a tag like "en-1901", even though that tag is not valid.
> 2.2.5 should be modified to prevent this.
Validators should not have been required to check variant prefixes,
given what the working group's intentions were originally. However, I
very much like firming the registration requirements for variants (from
SHOULD to MUST on having at least one Prefix) and leaving the validation
rules in place.
Notice that this would effectively forbid generic variants (the reason
for the SHOULD in the first place).
Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.
Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.
More information about the Ietf-languages