[Suppress-Script] Initial list of 300 languages
imcdonald at sharplabs.com
Thu Mar 16 20:51:20 CET 2006
Agreed. And with luck, I'm all wet about the running code
in many IPP printers. Note that the datatype did allow any
language tag up to 63 characters, although the documentation
erroneously described only simple 'lang-country' tags.
Programmers are lazy - they could easily be ignoring syntax
entirely and doing remove-from-right matching - which will
work fine if script is suppressed when not needed.
One reason for a bit of hope is the correct language tags
in the IETF Job Monitoring MIB v1 (RFC 2707), which has
shipped for many years from at least five printer vendors
and one operating system vendor.
On page 69 or RFC 2707, I originally wrote:
JmNaturalLanguageTagTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
"An IETF RFC 1766-compliant 'language tag', with zero or more
sub-tags that identify a natural language. While RFC 1766
specifies that the US-ASCII values are case-insensitive, this
MIB specification requires that all characters SHALL be lower
case in order to simplify comparing by management applications
See section 3.6.1, entitled: 'Text generated by the server or
device' and section 3.6.2, entitled: 'Text supplied by the job
SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..63))
Notice the complete absence of references to internal structure
or language/country codes.
All standards-based printer monitoring tools use the Job Mon MIB.
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
email: imcdonald at sharplabs.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no
> [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no]On Behalf Of Jon Hanna
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 12:17 PM
> To: ietf-languages at iana.org
> Subject: Re: [Suppress-Script] Initial list of 300 languages
> McDonald, Ira wrote:
> > PS - Thanks to Jon Hanna for just stating that since
> > they do things wrong (subset of RFC 1766 et al), every
> > network printer in the world today does NOT count as
> > "running code". That provided me a much needed laugh!
> > Oddly, occasionally people still need to _print_ a
> > document...
> I didn't say it wasn't running code, or even necessarily
> wrong per se. I
> just don't see that as running code governing RFC 1766
> successors, not
> being an application of RFC 1766.
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
More information about the Ietf-languages