John Cowan cowan at
Tue Dec 20 12:35:02 CET 2016

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:36 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ <mark at> wrote:

You are being mislead by the the term "Transformed Content" in the title of
> the RFC. As the abstract makes clear, the scope has always been broader
> than simply a transform.

I don't see that the abstract says that at all.  It specifies translation,
transcription, and transliterations as types of transformations, and
implies that there may be other types.  There is no hint of a semantic
extension to things beyond transformations.

The idea of -t- is that what comes before the -t- is the language of the
content as we have it, and what follows is the language of some other
content, called the source, from which this present content is somehow
derived.  Indeed, your ticket emphasizes the phrase "influenced by the
source."   But there is no source here, no all-English or all-Spanish
original from which the poems I quoted were made.   Using -t- to represent
an interlanguage text is tag abuse.

It's true that a machine translator like Google's that leaves words alone
that it does not understand (except for transliterating them) might produce
a text that looked vaguely like these poems, and such partially translated
output might be justly tagged en-t-es-m0-google or es-t-en-etc.  But that
case is not this case.

I have added a comment to the ticket expressing this view more tersely.

John Cowan        cowan at
Winter:  MIT, / Keio, INRIA, / Issue lots of Drafts.
So much more to understand! / Might simplicity return?
                (A "tanka", or extended haiku)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list