Proposal to remove Preferred-Value field for region YU in LTRU
doug at ewellic.org
Sat Feb 21 21:04:32 CET 2009
The LTRU Working Group needs the help of ietf-languages and the Reviewer
to make a decision.
In LTRU, where we are finishing work on RFC 4646bis and 4645bis, there
is a plan to change the Preferred-Value for subtags that point to other
subtags that also have Preferred-Values. The goal is to have
Preferred-Value always point to the "real" preferred value instead of
making the user (human or software) follow a chain. In other words,
instead of "A" -> "B" -> "C", we would have "A" -> "C", where the arrow
represents a Preferred-Value link.
This is primarily necessitated by the addition of the ISO 639-3-based
subtags, which are intended to supersede RFC 3066 registered tags and
variant subtags whenever possible. For example, we currently have
"i-hak" -> "zh-hakka" for Hakka. In RFC 4646bis, we will have the
639-3-based subtag "hak", meaning that the Preferred-Value chain will
become "i-hak" -> "zh-hakka" -> "hak". We plan to change the
Preferred-Value for "i-hak" to "hak" to eliminate this indirection.
Our question has to do with applying this logic to a particular region
subtag. Currently "YU" is deprecated with a Preferred-Value of "CS",
and "CS" is deprecated with no Preferred-Value at all, since there is no
single successor country. It might make more sense to remove the P-V
from "YU" altogether, to prevent the user from following a chain which
ultimately leads to a dead end. However, RFC 4646, Section 3.1 does not
permit this group to remove a Preferred-Value, although the proposed
4646bis will allow this.
As part of the production of a replacement Registry in draft-4645bis, it
has been proposed to remove the Preferred-Value from "YU" -- as an LTRU
change -- and optionally replace it with a Comments field such as
"Comments: see BA, HR, ME, MK, RS, or SI". This might be considered
analogous to the existing Comments field for "CS". It might also be
preferred by those who feel that "CS" was not a suitable P-V for "YU" in
the first place.
It has been objected that this type of change needs to be made by
ietf-languages and the Reviewer, once 4646bis is approved and published
and allows it, and should not be made by LTRU in the replacement
Please send opinions, preferences, and comments to this list.
Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
More information about the Ietf-languages