ID for language-invariant strings

CE Whitehead cewcathar at
Thu Mar 13 17:43:10 CET 2008

I agree that [mis] is not appropriate.   I'm not sure that [zxx] is appropriate either (I'd have to see the strings).  Regarding [und], that is for when you "can't be reasonably sure what the language is" () and the text it is embedded in is tagged for language ( (I'd have to see the strings again to form an opionion on the appropriateness of [und]).
Regarding [i-default],
section 4.5 of RFC 2277 ( ) begins
"When human-readable text must be presented in a context where the   sender has no knowledge of the recipient's language preferences (such   as login failures or E-mailed warnings, or prior to language   negotiation), text SHOULD be presented in Default Language."
Michael Everson suggested you send us the text in question, and, if you don't think [i-default] is appropriate, then you might send it and explain why, I guess.
--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at 
> From: Peter Constable <petercon at>> Subject: ID for language-invariant strings> To: "ietf-languages at" <ietf-languages at>> Message-ID:> <DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579562DEA50201 at>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"> > What are people's thoughts about language tagging for language-invariant strings?> > I'm working with a group on an application scenario in which we have a table of strings in various languages that name entities, but we also need to support entries that have a reference name that is considered a language-neutral form of a name for a given entity.> > Strictly speaking, these would be strings intended for programmatic operation and not human 
> consumption, and so, some might argue, are not in scope for IETF language tags. However,
> these are exceptional: almost all of the strings in the same table are intended for human
> consumption, and RFC 4646 is the spec being applied for identifying the language of strings in > the table. Moreover, the strings in question *are* (in general) in a human language; they are > just the values that are adopted to be used for language-neutral referencing.> > The "i-default" tag is not appropriate for this: these are not default display strings. 
??? I'd like to see the strings.
> And "zxx" is > not appropriate since, in fact, there is linguistic content. The "mis" tag doesn't 
>  seem like the 
> right choice: we do not want an ambiguous ID that could be applied to other entries intended 
> for a different purpose (strings intended for human consumption that happen to be in an 
> uncoded language.) The "und" tag might be usable, though that doesn't seem quite right to 
> me: we're not intending to say that the language is (as yet) undetermined (and might be > determined later); rather, we want a value indicating 'this is special content used as a
> referential key - the language of the content is irrelevant'.> 
> > From: Michael Everson <everson at>> Subject: Re: ID for language-invariant strings> To: "ietf-languages at" <ietf-languages at>> Message-ID: <p06240815c3fe881766a4@[]>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"> > Peter,> > I can't even begin to understand what "language-invariant" is meant > to mean. You say you are talking about some group of language names. > Favour us please with the actual language and or names, please, or > this idea should just fade away into the vagueness you have given us > about it.> +1> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list