From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 03 07:11:27 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IS9q1-0002hg-DV; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 07:11:25 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IS9q0-0002hb-BN for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 07:11:24 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IS9q0-0002hR-0k for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 07:11:24 -0400 Received: from mail07.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net ([159.134.118.23]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IS9pz-0006nN-BB for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 07:11:23 -0400 Received: (qmail 98163 messnum 2927260 invoked from network[194.125.174.108/ts09-108.dublin.indigo.ie]); 3 Sep 2007 11:11:21 -0000 Received: from ts09-108.dublin.indigo.ie (HELO ?194.125.174.108?) (194.125.174.108) by mail07.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 98163) with SMTP; 3 Sep 2007 11:11:21 -0000 In-Reply-To: <011501c7ebf4$0cc5b6a0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> References: <011501c7ebf4$0cc5b6a0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v728) X-Priority: 3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <15A84A43-3C53-4331-89B4-57A3537024D1@egt.ie> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Marion Gunn Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 12:11:20 +0000 To: LTRU Working Group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.728) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a7d6aff76b15f3f56fcb94490e1052e4 X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On 31 Aug 2007, at 17:26, scr=EDobh Doug Ewell: > ... > "Micro-" is an obvious opposite of "macro-". This sort of word-=20 > forming process is common among technical-minded people, including =20 > much of the LTRU membership (I make up words every day)... I hope you have now seen it demonstrated (in recent mails) that said =20 tendency to "make up words ever day" only worsens a problem for which =20= the obvious cure is a neat Terms and Definitions section. On 31 Aug 2007, at 18:26, scr=EDobh Doug Ewell: > ... > For my part, I understand that "extlang" is not the official name =20 > for this type of subtag, and didn't mean to propose defining it =20 > formally if you were talking to me. We use it all the time because =20= > it's easier to type 7 letters than 24. Yet more reason to either define such informal terms as you make up. =20 After that, you may even propose making them formal, if you so wish. > ... > One thing the document does not need is to be longer. If we do add =20= > such a section, we should attempt to strip out the now-redundant =20 > inline definitions that exist throughout the document... Exactly. mg ps. To follow my own advice, I would define an "innocent professional" as =20= someone who is professionally proficient one discipline/field of =20 discourse, but is coming as a relative newcomer to another in which =20 they can so easily be misled. It makes no assumptions as to their =20 innocence or otherwise in daily professional/personal life.:-) mg _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 03 18:18:59 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISKG0-0005L8-Ml; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 18:18:56 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISKFz-0005K2-JD for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 18:18:55 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISKFz-0005IB-7n for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 18:18:55 -0400 Received: from mta15.mail.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.77] helo=mta15.adelphia.net) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISKFy-0008Fz-SP for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 18:18:55 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta15.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.04 201-2131-123-105-20051025) with SMTP id <20070903221853.ZWGT25705.mta15.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for ; Mon, 3 Sep 2007 18:18:53 -0400 Message-ID: <002901c7ee78$6a120300$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" To: "LTRU Working Group" Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 15:18:53 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Subject: [Ltru] Re: New draft posted to Web X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Saturday, August 18, 2007 10:27, I wrote: >> Please, if you want the working group to comment, submit the draft to >> internet-drafts at ietf.org > > Done. I've written back to internet-drafts to inquire why my draft still hasn't been published more than two weeks after being submitted. I'm hoping it's just about ready for WGLC, except of course for the extlang/macrolanguage question. -- Doug Ewell · Fullerton, California, USA · RFC 4645 · UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 03 23:46:54 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISPNM-0005jx-GR; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 23:46:52 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISPNL-0005jq-R5 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 23:46:51 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISPNL-0005jh-HY for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 23:46:51 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISPNK-0002W2-8T for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 23:46:51 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1ISPNH-0006yq-M1; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 23:46:47 -0400 Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 23:46:47 -0400 To: Addison Phillips Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang Message-ID: <20070904034647.GE30097@mercury.ccil.org> References: <30b660a20708281459r6000d746qe007f2882fae6d73@mail.gmail.com> <20070828223536.GB31670@mercury.ccil.org> <30b660a20708281812s3401e193u7c90d3ab22ac3eda@mail.gmail.com> <46D6FAA3.2030805@yahoo-inc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46D6FAA3.2030805@yahoo-inc.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 5a9a1bd6c2d06a21d748b7d0070ddcb8 Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Addison Phillips scripsit: > Thus, if I were to support extlang, it would be based solely on John > Cowan's argument that we need extlang to prevent a "retagging crisis" > for languages formerly enclosed by a macrolanguage. Indeed, I think this is the most important point. RFCs come and go, but tagging decisions ought not to have to be revisited. We have already obsoleted some IETF or semi-IETF tags in favor of ISO ones, but there's no getting away from that. > 2. Randy suggested (a long while ago now) that cherry-picking from the > macrolanguage list would be a bad idea. Yet tag stability provisions > prevent us from taking the list wholesale. Three macrolanguages with seven encompassed languages, all accounted for by the same pre-existing principle (stability), hardly counts as cherry-picking. > And I have some concern that the macrolanguage "collections" (if you'll > pardon this inaccurate term) have yet to be thoroughly tested. They > may not be stable or suitable in the short-to-medium term. This is > not a critique of ISO 639-3's work here. It is merely a note of caution. I'm not sure what counts as testing in this case. Can you explain further? > If I were to support doing extlangs, it would consider each > macrolanguage separately, as a one-time-event, and, again, solely as a > compatibility item. That's pretty much what SIL (read Peter C) actually did. > Note that we also face our own exception--I assume future sign languages > would be treated as extlangs for compatibility reasons. Note that sign > languages are NOT macrolanguages in the first place--they are already > exceptional. I would favor eliminating this use of extlang too. That's a point I hadn't considered. New sign languages do arise. > ... but I feel that we're doing a disservice to the various languages > involved by making them extlangs. Shouldn't Cantonese, Wu, or Hakka be > treated fully as languages? The fact is that people don't: they are *not* treated fully as languages except by linguists and people strongly influenced by them. > Users can still use the macrolanguage tag instead (I doubt we'll see > much 'cmn-*' when 'zh-*' is available). Exactly. People will continue to use "zh", but those who want to be more explicit can use "zh-cmn", just as people who want to be explicit about script can use "zh-Hans". With extlangs, there is a soft choice between "zh" and "zh-cmn" rather than a hard choice between "zh" and "cmn". -- Where the wombat has walked, John Cowan it will inevitably walk again. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 07:20:17 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISWS8-0005wP-Rg; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 07:20:16 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISWS7-0005wK-Mk for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 07:20:15 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISWS7-0005wC-DF for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 07:20:15 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.185]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISWS6-00063X-0K for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 07:20:15 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id l15so1094182rvb for ; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 04:20:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=RvgL24Yjuc2rvLTvXGqckyz27VSj5V8LYoFOIgqTpOAcmXRg6aadb8V0P34Q36eoDE3mtAoyGuwZHIi3PU2srmrco25RsRq2yiUewlh/pyB4IfjcGCL0tp4vrWnP87yX1y4/bJlQ/hGWisPlicZesRmClNm4L5IDJOkl6jvOJFE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=fKiz9qV0CRpA8+44zXEn6m3Qlbs0oM5hagjwDcD8Vf1oP4Ccl6HLPkscSWbao72LGRicW6igDvbgilrnq0UuZ7NQg6C9faaSmQ4194PVI978L6Jj9DzR8qSZaJKzz54MuO2hX1LJGDIzcv45ctn9xXd6OU+6eNWPnFhxrbw9vX4= Received: by 10.140.144.4 with SMTP id r4mr2275305rvd.1188904813079; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 04:20:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.197.13 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 04:20:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <41a006820709040420t312cc6c2h7da81f0c3a7b1241@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 13:20:12 +0200 From: GerardM To: "John Cowan" Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang In-Reply-To: <20070904034647.GE30097@mercury.ccil.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <30b660a20708281459r6000d746qe007f2882fae6d73@mail.gmail.com> <20070828223536.GB31670@mercury.ccil.org> <30b660a20708281812s3401e193u7c90d3ab22ac3eda@mail.gmail.com> <46D6FAA3.2030805@yahoo-inc.com> <20070904034647.GE30097@mercury.ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2056372837==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============2056372837== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_22408_29750679.1188904812992" ------=_Part_22408_29750679.1188904812992 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline > > Exactly. People will continue to use "zh", but those who want to be more > explicit can use "zh-cmn", just as people who want to be explicit about > script can use "zh-Hans". With extlangs, there is a soft choice between > "zh" and "zh-cmn" rather than a hard choice between "zh" and "cmn". Hoi, >From my perspective the system is how it is, the codes are mainly to be used by computers and it can look as horrible as it does. I do not care what people do because that would mean that we accept that they will continue to have 85% of the Internet not tagged and most of what is tagged tagged incorrectly. My question is about Min Nan, according to what is proposed zh-nan. This language has been written in both the Chinese script and the Latin script for several centuries. According to my information it was already written in the Latin script in the 16th century in the Philippines. The question, zh implies one of the Chinese scripts. Should the code therefore be zh-nan-Latn and, should there not be a code for the particular orthography as well and can a code for the orthography replace the Latn indicator. NB this is a practical question as the Wikipedia in Min-Nan is written in the Latin script. Thanks, Gerard ------=_Part_22408_29750679.1188904812992 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
Exactly.  People will continue to use "zh", but those who want to be more
explicit can use "zh-cmn", just as people who want to be explicit about
script can use "zh-Hans".  With extlangs, there is a soft choice between
"zh" and "zh-cmn" rather than a hard choice between "zh" and "cmn".

Hoi,
From my perspective the system is how it is, the codes are mainly to be used by computers and it can look as horrible as it does. I do not care what people do because that would mean that we accept that they will continue to have 85% of the Internet not tagged and most of what is tagged tagged incorrectly.

My question is about Min Nan, according to what is proposed zh-nan. This language has been written in both the Chinese script and the Latin script for several centuries. According to my information it was already written in the Latin script in the 16th century in the Philippines. The question, zh implies one of the Chinese scripts. Should the code therefore be zh-nan-Latn and, should there not be a code for the particular orthography as well and can a code for the orthography replace the Latn indicator.

NB this is a practical question as the Wikipedia in Min-Nan is written in the Latin script.

Thanks,
     Gerard
------=_Part_22408_29750679.1188904812992-- --===============2056372837== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============2056372837==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 08:33:22 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXao-0007eH-Ig; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 08:33:18 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXan-0007eB-4r for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 08:33:17 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXam-0007e3-Re for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 08:33:16 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXal-0008CU-A8 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 08:33:16 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXWl-00005G-9X for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:29:07 +0200 Received: from pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.86.170.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:29:07 +0200 Received: from nobody by pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:29:07 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 14:24:16 +0200 Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <002c01c7ca8b$076f2d60$6a01a8c0@DGBP7M81><46A049B5.2050800@yahoo-inc.com><20070720060014.GQ5737@mercury.ccil.org><46A052B8.3060508@yahoo-inc.com> <011701c7cae9$f23811a0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Randy Presuhn wrote: > 2) The registry file itself currently uses something which is = similar > to an NCR. Are we willing to change the registry format to > a) use actual NCRs for non-ASCII code points, making = conversion > to XML even more trivial than it already is, while still > giving some fallback to folks inspecting the data for = errors > or looking at it through ASCII windows [...] Hi, the NCRs in the registry are "real" NCRs, using the hex. format recommended by the W3C "charmod". Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 08:51:30 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXsN-0006si-Uz; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 08:51:27 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXsM-0006sc-RF for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 08:51:26 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXsM-0006sU-Hh for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 08:51:26 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXsL-0000DB-8g for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 08:51:26 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISXrG-0004Ss-46 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:50:18 +0200 Received: from pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.86.170.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:50:18 +0200 Received: from nobody by pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:50:18 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 14:43:21 +0200 Lines: 24 Message-ID: References: <002901c7ee78$6a120300$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: New draft posted to Web X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Doug Ewell wrote: > I'm hoping it's just about ready for WGLC, except of course for the=20 > extlang/macrolanguage question. Hi, I've updated my awk script for the "macrolanguage" business: http://xyzzy.webhop.info/home/ltru/ltru2xml.awk (version 0.7) http://xyzzy.webhop.info/home/ltru/ltru2xml.dtd (modified DTD) http://xyzzy.webhop.info/home/ltru/4645bis2.xml (based on -02) http://xyzzy.webhop.info/home/ltru/4645bis.awk (script to extract the proto registry from your drafts). All still using ASCII and text/xml, not UTF-8 and application/xml. IMHO the "Macrolanguage" field is rather pointless for extlang-s, it's always the same as the "Prefix" with two exceptions: 1 - all sign extlangs don't have a Macrolanguage: sgn 2 - in theory extlang ccc in aa-bbb-ccc would get Prefix: aa-bbb and Macrolanguage: bbb. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 09:58:07 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISYut-0004ar-AJ; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 09:58:07 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISYus-0004am-GN for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 09:58:06 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISYus-0004ad-5l for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 09:58:06 -0400 Received: from mta9.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.199]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISYur-0001f1-O3 for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 09:58:06 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta9.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070904135803.SOYR7790.mta9.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for ; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 09:58:03 -0400 Message-ID: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" To: "LTRU Working Group" Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 06:58:04 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa Subject: [Ltru] Re: extlang X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org GerardM wrote: > My question is about Min Nan, according to what is proposed zh-nan. > This language has been written in both the Chinese script and the > Latin script for several centuries. According to my information it was > already written in the Latin script in the 16th century in the > Philippines. The question, zh implies one of the Chinese scripts. > Should the code therefore be zh-nan-Latn and, should there not be a > code for the particular orthography as well and can a code for the > orthography replace the Latn indicator. > > NB this is a practical question as the Wikipedia in Min-Nan is written > in the Latin script. My opinion, and mine alone, is that you should be able to use "zh-nan" and not worry about the script subtag. Not every tagging scenario requires explicit specification, or even implication, of the script, just as not every tagging scenario requires identification of the region. Specifying the script is important when it is necessary to contrast it with other scripts. For example, you might write "zh-nan-Latn" to distinguish it from "zh-nan-Hani" if it were necessary to distinguish between the two. The fact that the Min-Nan Wikipedia text is written does not necessarily mean this is necessary. This is one of the things I dislike about Suppress-Script: it tends to imply that the script subtag is always important, and is simply being omitted in this tag for brevity or compatibility. If we get rid of extended language subtags, of course, then this is a moot point: "nan" can be given a Suppress-Script of "Latn", or can be left alone, and neither choice would imply anything about Han. I see no reason why the Min-Nan *orthography* needs its own subtag, unless (again) it needs to be distinguished from Min-Nan written in some other Latin orthography. Thousands of languages use the Latin script with their own orthography. There's nothing unique about Min-Nan in this regard. -- Doug Ewell · Fullerton, California, USA · RFC 4645 · UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 10:39:39 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISZZ2-0008A1-M7; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:39:36 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISZZ0-00089v-M8 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:39:34 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISZZ0-00089n-Bu for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:39:34 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISZYz-0002su-Vb for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:39:34 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1ISZYy-0000qz-Ea; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:39:32 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 10:39:32 -0400 To: Doug Ewell Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang Message-ID: <20070904143932.GA10776@mercury.ccil.org> References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Doug Ewell scripsit: > This is one of the things I dislike about Suppress-Script: it tends to > imply that the script subtag is always important, and is simply being > omitted in this tag for brevity or compatibility. Well, we are stuck with it, and as currently written "zh-nan" *means* "zh-nan-Hani", alas. So if we go with extlangs, we need to add language allowing, and giving the interpretation of, the Suppress-Script: header when attached to an extlang subtag, and explaining that extlangs don't inherit Suppress-Script: from their parents. > If we get rid of extended language subtags, of course, then this is a > moot point: "nan" can be given a Suppress-Script of "Latn", or can be > left alone, and neither choice would imply anything about Han. Indeed. -- There is / One art John Cowan No more / No less http://www.ccil.org/~cowan To do / All things With art- / Lessness -- Piet Hein _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 11:11:43 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISa46-0000E9-Uz; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:11:43 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISa46-0000E3-8G for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:11:42 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISa45-0000Ds-Tc for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:11:41 -0400 Received: from mta11.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.205]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISa45-0003mH-FP for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:11:41 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta11.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070904151140.HSHF14340.mta11.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for ; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 11:11:40 -0400 Message-ID: <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" To: "LTRU Working Group" References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 08:11:40 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7aafa0432175920a4b3e118e16c5cb64 X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org GerardM wrote: > The confusing thing for me now is that zh implies a script. I don't necessarily agree with you and John on this, but I'll leave this point alone. > It is the one reason why it is is reasonable to include Min Nan as > being part of Chinese. Without it the whole argument of zh including > all the other languages falls for me flat on its face. So I do not > understand how Min Nan in another script can be accepted without > identifying the script either through the orthography or through > identifying the script. *IF* we implement extended language subtags -- I don't feel comfortable using the term "extlang" any more, since it's not the formal term and doesn't appear in any official Terms and Definitions section -- then we are implementing them strictly on the basis of macrolanguage assignments made by ISO 639-3/RA. If their decision is that Min Nan "is a" Chinese, then that is that; we don't second-guess them and toss out the ones we don't agree with. The only exceptions are (1) when a primary language subtag already exists for the language in question, which is *exactly* analogous (IMHO) to using alpha-2 ISO 639-1 codes in preference to alpha-3 ISO 639-2 codes when they are available, and (2) sign languages, which are fundamentally different and not really handled in a consistent manner between ISO 639-2 and -3. John Cowan wrote: >> This is one of the things I dislike about Suppress-Script: it tends >> to imply that the script subtag is always important, and is simply >> being omitted in this tag for brevity or compatibility. > > Well, we are stuck with it, and as currently written "zh-nan" *means* > "zh-nan-Hani", alas. So if we go with extlangs, we need to add > language allowing, and giving the interpretation of, the > Suppress-Script: header when attached to an extlang subtag, and > explaining that extlangs don't inherit Suppress-Script: from their > parents. I prefer "don't necessarily inherit." We would certainly want extended language subtags to inherit Suppress-Script from their Prefix *by default*, so that all the Arabics, all the Quechuas, etc. would do the Right Thing. But we would allow this to be overridden at the second level. -- Doug Ewell · Fullerton, California, USA · RFC 4645 · UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 11:35:55 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISaRU-0000x4-H2; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:35:52 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISaRS-0000wP-LL for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:35:50 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISaRS-0000uN-AL for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:35:50 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISaRS-0004Yh-0Y for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:35:50 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1ISaRR-0005Lf-N3; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:35:49 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 11:35:49 -0400 To: Doug Ewell Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang Message-ID: <20070904153549.GB10776@mercury.ccil.org> References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Doug Ewell scripsit: > I prefer "don't necessarily inherit." We would certainly want extended > language subtags to inherit Suppress-Script from their Prefix *by > default*, so that all the Arabics, all the Quechuas, etc. would do the > Right Thing. But we would allow this to be overridden at the second > level. That's what I thought at first too. Unfortunately, it doesn't work, because there is no explicit way to say "there is no Suppress-Script for this language". So if Hani is the Suppress-Script for 'zh' (as is appropriate), but if there is no dominant script for "zh-nan", then if there is Suppress-Script inheritance, there is no way to specify the correct Suppress-Script header for 'nan'. -- Time alone is real John Cowan the rest imaginary like a quaternion --phma http://www.ccil.org/~cowan _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 11:46:21 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISabc-0001IW-P1; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:46:20 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISaba-00016B-Kb for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:46:18 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISaba-00012R-6H for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:46:18 -0400 Received: from smtp.microsoft.com ([131.107.115.214]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISabY-00058u-Qn for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:46:18 -0400 Received: from tk1-exhub-c101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.56.116.111) by TK5-EXGWY-E803.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.169) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.177.2; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 08:46:16 -0700 Received: from NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.62.44]) by tk1-exhub-c101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.56.116.111]) with mapi; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 08:46:15 -0700 From: Peter Constable To: Doug Ewell , LTRU Working Group Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 08:46:14 -0700 Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: extlang Thread-Topic: [Ltru] Re: extlang Thread-Index: AcfvBekHT6w1aCMPTz+ePn4eaCe4QAABFQcQ Message-ID: References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> In-Reply-To: <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: -8.0 (--------) X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199 Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0670419012==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============0670419012== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 RnJvbTogRG91ZyBFd2VsbCBbbWFpbHRvOmRld2VsbEByb2FkcnVubmVyLmNvbV0NCg0KPiAqSUYq IHdlIGltcGxlbWVudCBleHRlbmRlZCBsYW5ndWFnZSBzdWJ0YWdzLi4uIHRoZW4gd2UNCj4gYXJl IGltcGxlbWVudGluZyB0aGVtIHN0cmljdGx5IG9uIHRoZSBiYXNpcyBvZiBtYWNyb2xhbmd1YWdl IGFzc2lnbm1lbnRzDQo+IG1hZGUgYnkgSVNPIDYzOS0zL1JBLiAgSWYgdGhlaXIgZGVjaXNpb24g aXMgdGhhdCBNaW4gTmFuICJpcyBhIiBDaGluZXNlLA0KPiB0aGVuIHRoYXQgaXMgdGhhdDsgd2Ug ZG9uJ3Qgc2Vjb25kLWd1ZXNzIHRoZW0gYW5kIHRvc3Mgb3V0IHRoZSBvbmVzIHdlDQo+IGRvbid0 IGFncmVlIHdpdGguDQoNCkp1c3QgYXMgYSBwb2ludCBvZiBoaXN0b3J5LCBpdCB3YXMgbW9yZSBv ciBsZXNzIHRoaXMgY29tbXVuaXR5IHRoYXQgZGVjaWRlZCB0aGlzOiB0aGUgSVNPIDYzOS9SQS1K QUMgaGFkIG5vIGNob2ljZSBhYm91dCB3aGV0aGVyIE1pbiBOYW4gImlzIGEiIENoaW5lc2UgKGlu IHRoZSBzZW5zZSBvZiB3aGV0aGVyICJuYW4iIG11c3QgYmUgdHJlYXRlZCBhcyBlbmNvbXBhc3Nl ZCBieSAiemgobykiKSBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZSBJRVRGIExhbmd1YWdlcyBMaXN0IGVzdGFibGlzaGVk IHRoYXQgYXNzb2NpYXRpb24gc2V2ZXJhbCB5ZWFycyBlYXJsaWVyLg0KDQoNCg0KUGV0ZXINCg== --===============0670419012== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============0670419012==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 13:11:58 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISbwT-0001rN-Q5; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:11:57 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISbwS-0001rH-LP for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:11:56 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISbwS-0001qF-Aj for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:11:56 -0400 Received: from rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.150]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISbwR-0006r0-Mv for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:11:56 -0400 Received: from [172.21.37.80] (duringperson-lx.corp.yahoo.com [172.21.37.80]) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l84HBcqi036860 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Sep 2007 10:11:41 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=MVvZfKJPp+5n1cAsrgK2AJaRu7gTF+0gnug4pKKR2hROI0xr4+dtVt9FnBQ8W3OF Message-ID: <46DD91CA.7070507@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:11:38 -0700 From: Addison Phillips User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Cowan Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <20070904153549.GB10776@mercury.ccil.org> In-Reply-To: <20070904153549.GB10776@mercury.ccil.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -15.0 (---------------) X-Scan-Signature: e1e48a527f609d1be2bc8d8a70eb76cb Cc: Doug Ewell , LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org John Cowan wrote: > So if Hani is the Suppress-Script for 'zh' (as is > appropriate), Only 'Hani' isn't a Suppress-Script entry for 'zh' and furthermore, it should not be. The Hant/Hans distinction is important for Chinese written texts: we do not want people to suppress these subtags even by implication. Ideally these should be encouraged in written contexts. Note: here is the record for Chinese: %% Type: language Subtag: zh Description: Chinese Added: 2005-10-16 %% Suppress-Script is an *informative* field relevant to tag choice. It's purpose is to discourage the use of script subtags in tags that previously would not have included them (such as "en-US" or "es-MX"). It is not meant to turn off script subtags when they represent a real textual distinction--even when the subtag is supposedly suppressed. The important point is to use the script subtag only when it indicates an actual distinction in the text. Gerard is free to choose between "zh-nan" and "zh-nan-Latn" depending on his requirements. If he were to have both Han and Latin script representations of Min Nan, then he should probably use the script subtag. Since he doesn't believe that there is a 'Hani' orthography, he doesn't need to use 'Latn' to indicate that he isn't use it. Addison -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 19:27:30 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IShnt-0004Oc-5Y; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:27:29 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IShnr-0004OW-51 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:27:27 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IShnq-0004OO-Rf for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:27:26 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IShnp-0008DV-CL for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:27:26 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IShnk-0000Vf-0q; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:27:20 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 19:27:20 -0400 To: Addison Phillips Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang Message-ID: <20070904232719.GD10776@mercury.ccil.org> References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <20070904153549.GB10776@mercury.ccil.org> <46DD91CA.7070507@yahoo-inc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46DD91CA.7070507@yahoo-inc.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 Cc: LTRU Working Group , Doug Ewell X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Addison Phillips scripsit: > John Cowan wrote: > >So if Hani is the Suppress-Script for 'zh' (as is > >appropriate), > > Only 'Hani' isn't a Suppress-Script entry for 'zh' and furthermore, it > should not be. Oops, a brain-fart on my part. Here is the list of macrolanguages with Suppress-Scripts: ay Aymara Suppress-Script:Latn fa Persian Suppress-Script:Arab gn Guarani Suppress-Script:Latn kok Konkani Suppress-Script:Deva ms Malay Suppress-Script:Latn no Norwegian Suppress-Script:Latn om Oromo Suppress-Script:Latn ps Pushto Suppress-Script:Arab qu Quechua Suppress-Script:Latn sq Albanian Suppress-Script:Latn sw Swahili Suppress-Script:Latn tmh Tamashek Suppress-Script:Latn yi Yiddish Suppress-Script:Hebr I think that none of these except Konkani constitute any problem. I'm posting on Konkani to ietf-languages. -- Dream projects long deferred John Cowan usually bite the wax tadpole. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan --James Lileks _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 04 22:29:07 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISkdc-0006DW-UF; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:29:04 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISkdb-00069m-EN for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:29:03 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISkdb-00069M-43 for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:29:03 -0400 Received: from mta16.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.211]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISkda-0004Vj-Nz for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:29:03 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta16.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.04 201-2131-123-105-20051025) with SMTP id <20070905022900.TPQP16499.mta16.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81>; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 22:29:00 -0400 Message-ID: <001b01c7ef64$84f16890$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" To: "LTRU Working Group" References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <20070904153549.GB10776@mercury.ccil.org> <46DD91CA.7070507@yahoo-inc.com> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 19:29:00 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22 Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Addison Phillips wrote: >> So if Hani is the Suppress-Script for 'zh' (as is appropriate), > > Only 'Hani' isn't a Suppress-Script entry for 'zh' and furthermore, it > should not be. The Hant/Hans distinction is important for Chinese > written texts: we do not want people to suppress these subtags even by > implication. Ideally these should be encouraged in written contexts. > > Note: here is the record for Chinese: > > %% > Type: language > Subtag: zh > Description: Chinese > Added: 2005-10-16 > %% I apologize for jumping into this without first verifying Gerard's claim that "zh implies one of the Chinese scripts," i.e. that it has a Suppress-Script. -- Doug Ewell · Fullerton, California, USA · RFC 4645 · UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 05 08:09:43 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISthW-0006xR-5p; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:09:42 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISthU-0006xL-Tv for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:09:40 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISthU-0006xD-Im for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:09:40 -0400 Received: from mail19.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net ([159.134.118.218]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISthT-0003Ds-VH for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:09:40 -0400 Received: (qmail 23159 messnum 7452631 invoked from network[194.125.174.10/ts09-010.dublin.indigo.ie]); 5 Sep 2007 12:09:38 -0000 Received: from ts09-010.dublin.indigo.ie (HELO ?194.125.174.10?) (194.125.174.10) by mail19.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 23159) with SMTP; 5 Sep 2007 12:09:38 -0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v728) In-Reply-To: References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <4E3E1D46-9DC2-4E62-87A4-74C5BAF270B1@egt.ie> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Marion Gunn Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 13:09:34 +0000 To: LTRU Working Group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.728) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org What Peter Constable says below sounds true to me, from what I can =20 recall of the little I could understand of that particular debate, =20 which was not very much at all. FWIW, for a relevant example of my TC 46 Terms and Definitions in =20 International Standards teamwork, please see TC 46/SC 11's first =20 standard, ISO 15489. For more of my work (again, in the field of =20 compiling and harmonizing Terms and Definitions in International =20 Standards), please consult also TC 37's ISO 704 and ISO 5127. I =20 believe they all provide good models, should LTRU ever decide to go =20 the T&D route. I could cite more examples, but trust this note is =20 enough to assist list members who are busy e-mailing me privately, so =20= that we may avoid more mail than is needed at present (short =20 lunchtime of a busy working day in Ireland). mg On 4 Sep 2007, at 15:46, scr=EDobh Peter Constable: > From: Doug Ewell [mailto:dewell@roadrunner.com] > > >> *IF* we implement extended language subtags... then we >> are implementing them strictly on the basis of macrolanguage =20 >> assignments >> made by ISO 639-3/RA. If their decision is that Min Nan "is a" =20 >> Chinese, >> then that is that; we don't second-guess them and toss out the =20 >> ones we >> don't agree with. >> > > Just as a point of history, it was more or less this community that =20= > decided this: the ISO 639/RA-JAC had no choice about whether Min =20 > Nan "is a" Chinese (in the sense of whether "nan" must be treated =20 > as encompassed by "zh(o)") because the IETF Languages List =20 > established that association several years earlier. - - Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991) 27 P=E1irc an Fh=E9ithlinn, Baile an Bh=F3thair, Co. =C1tha Cliath, =C9ire. * mgunn@egt.ie * eamonn@egt.ie * _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 05 08:42:15 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuCy-0008Hg-Ds; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:42:12 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuCx-0008Do-TV for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:42:11 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuCx-0008AI-F6 for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:42:11 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuCw-00026k-0M for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:42:11 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 550381C0103; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:42:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 509B61C00FB; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:42:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DCC458EBC3; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:42:09 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:42:09 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Marion Gunn Message-ID: <20070905124209.GA575@nic.fr> References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <4E3E1D46-9DC2-4E62-87A4-74C5BAF270B1@egt.ie> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E3E1D46-9DC2-4E62-87A4-74C5BAF270B1@egt.ie> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: LTRU Working Group Subject: [Ltru] Availability of ISO documents (Was: extlang X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 01:09:34PM +0000, Marion Gunn wrote a message of 49 lines which said: > for a relevant example of my TC 46 Terms and Definitions in > International Standards teamwork, please see TC 46/SC 11's first > standard, ISO 15489. For more of my work (again, in the field of > compiling and harmonizing Terms and Definitions in International > Standards), please consult also TC 37's ISO 704 and ISO 5127. I would appreciate that people who post references to ISO documents also indicate how to find them. Since ISO documents are typically not available from ISO, you have to google or wikipediate to try to find a more or less official copy. That's painful and you risk finding an obsolete version. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 05 08:45:04 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuFk-0001ox-9u; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:45:04 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuFj-0001oq-6X for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:45:03 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuFi-0001oh-SA for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:45:02 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuFi-0004JD-JR for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:45:02 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1ISuFh-00079s-22; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:45:01 -0400 Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 08:45:01 -0400 To: Stephane Bortzmeyer Subject: Re: [Ltru] Availability of ISO documents (Was: extlang Message-ID: <20070905124501.GF30980@mercury.ccil.org> References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <4E3E1D46-9DC2-4E62-87A4-74C5BAF270B1@egt.ie> <20070905124209.GA575@nic.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070905124209.GA575@nic.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Stephane Bortzmeyer scripsit: > I would appreciate that people who post references to ISO documents > also indicate how to find them. Since ISO documents are typically not > available from ISO, you have to google or wikipediate to try to find a > more or less official copy. That's painful and you risk finding an > obsolete version. They are indeed available from ISO as well as from the national bodies that make up ISO. At a high, high price, determined by page count not utility. -- A poetical purist named Cowan [that's me: cowan@ccil.org] Once put the rest of us dowan. [on xml-dev] "Your verse would be sweeter http://www.ccil.org/~cowan If it only had metre And rhymes that didn't force me to frowan." [overpacked line!] --Michael Kay _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 05 08:54:10 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuOX-0006cO-O9; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:54:09 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuOW-0006c7-V1 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:54:08 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuOW-0006br-Kk for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:54:08 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISuOV-0002RL-Dz for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 08:54:08 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 16C9C1C010C; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:54:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11A771C00FB; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:54:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0404658EBC3; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:54:07 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:54:07 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: John Cowan Message-ID: <20070905125406.GA12608@nic.fr> References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <4E3E1D46-9DC2-4E62-87A4-74C5BAF270B1@egt.ie> <20070905124209.GA575@nic.fr> <20070905124501.GF30980@mercury.ccil.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070905124501.GF30980@mercury.ccil.org> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Cc: LTRU Working Group Subject: [Ltru] Re: Availability of ISO documents (Was: extlang X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 08:45:01AM -0400, John Cowan wrote a message of 18 lines which said: > They are indeed available from ISO [...] At a high, high price, And not redistributable. And I don't even know if they are available in a easily processable format (XML, plain text, etc). _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 05 10:00:19 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISvQY-0003LD-TO; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 10:00:18 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISvQX-0003H9-Ik for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 10:00:17 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISvQW-0003EH-RT for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 10:00:16 -0400 Received: from mail07.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net ([159.134.118.23]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISvQV-0004JK-Ex for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 10:00:16 -0400 Received: (qmail 42404 messnum 2966224 invoked from network[194.125.205.82/ts07-082.dublin.indigo.ie]); 5 Sep 2007 14:00:13 -0000 Received: from ts07-082.dublin.indigo.ie (HELO ?194.125.205.82?) (194.125.205.82) by mail07.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 42404) with SMTP; 5 Sep 2007 14:00:13 -0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v728) In-Reply-To: <20070905124209.GA575@nic.fr> References: <005701c7eefb$9d748690$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <41a006820709040718y467b430ai53f548556088c096@mail.gmail.com> <006301c7ef05$e5e762d0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <4E3E1D46-9DC2-4E62-87A4-74C5BAF270B1@egt.ie> <20070905124209.GA575@nic.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Marion Gunn Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 15:00:09 +0000 To: LTRU Working Group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.728) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 Subject: [Ltru] Re: Availability of ISO documents (Was: extlang X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org All true. So, am I wrong to make the assumption that at least some =20 members of this list must have access to the docs I listed - surely, =20 those who are also contributors to ISO Standards must have, and have =20 gained enough from reading them to be able to act on the principles =20 they advocate? Right or wrong, that is hardly my problem. mg On 5 Sep 2007, at 12:42, scr=EDobh Stephane Bortzmeyer: > On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 01:09:34PM +0000, > Marion Gunn wrote > a message of 49 lines which said: > > >> for a relevant example of my TC 46 Terms and Definitions in >> International Standards teamwork, please see TC 46/SC 11's first >> standard, ISO 15489. For more of my work (again, in the field of >> compiling and harmonizing Terms and Definitions in International >> Standards), please consult also TC 37's ISO 704 and ISO 5127. >> > > I would appreciate that people who post references to ISO documents > also indicate how to find them. Since ISO documents are typically not > available from ISO, you have to google or wikipediate to try to find a > more or less official copy. That's painful and you risk finding an > obsolete version. > > > - - Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991) 27 P=E1irc an Fh=E9ithlinn, Baile an Bh=F3thair, Co. =C1tha Cliath, =C9ire. * mgunn@egt.ie * eamonn@egt.ie * _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 05 14:44:47 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISzrn-00059u-2r; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 14:44:43 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ISzrl-00056X-2L for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 14:44:41 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISzrk-00055X-NX for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 14:44:40 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.69]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISzrk-0005Ig-Fh for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 14:44:40 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=tepCh5tZ6zYL1dSfgHafF9s10j04aA0CNp2L4kJtz37k4Uwux5pFrlJQACt0636K; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [66.167.77.70] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ISzrj-0002pU-KM for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 14:44:40 -0400 Message-ID: <001701c7efed$336827a0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" To: "LTRU Working Group" Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 11:47:24 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888fa44b31bb60a93562e5e84cdaf90d4d56845405ff77de2cc350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 66.167.77.70 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Subject: [Ltru] 70th IETF - ltru session? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi - The secretariat is now accepting scheduling requests for the 70th IETF meeting, to be held in Vancouver, BC, Canada on December 2-7, 2007. Currently, there are no plans for a session of the ltru working group at that meeting. If you think that a face-to-face session would be helpful or necessary, please send your comments and agenda proposals to ltru@ietf.org for consideration. The cut-off date for requests to schedule Working Group sessions is Monday, October first. Randy ltru co-chair _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 04:05:44 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITCMv-0003DU-PX; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 04:05:41 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITCMv-0003DM-4h for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 04:05:41 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITCMt-0003DA-CL for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 04:05:39 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITCMr-0007L4-Tt for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 04:05:39 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id A115F1C00D4; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 10:05:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6731C009D; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 10:05:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 990CA58EB6A; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 10:05:36 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 10:05:36 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Randy Presuhn Message-ID: <20070906080536.GA19523@nic.fr> References: <001701c7efed$336827a0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <001701c7efed$336827a0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3 Cc: LTRU Working Group Subject: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 11:47:24AM -0700, Randy Presuhn wrote a message of 21 lines which said: > Currently, there are no plans for a session of the ltru working > group at that meeting. If you think that a face-to-face session > would be helpful or necessary, please send your comments and agenda > proposals to ltru@ietf.org for consideration. Reading (without giving opinions because I'm very unsure) about the long and complicated discussion about extlangs and macrolanguages make me believe that a face-to-face meeting would be a Good Idea: Agenda: * Agenda bashing (1 mn) * Extlangs and macrolanguages (50 mn) ** What are the requirments (matching with fallback, compatibility, staying in the spirit of ISO 639-3) ** Solution 1 (extlang after the macrolanguage for instance "oc-prv") ** Solution 2 (no more extlangs, all languages are created equal for instance "prv") ** Mixtures * AOB (5 mn) _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 10:53:53 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITIjv-0000kr-MA; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 10:53:51 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITIjt-0000ek-TF for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 10:53:49 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITIjt-0000X7-BM for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 10:53:49 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.183]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITIjr-00014J-W8 for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 10:53:49 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k40so313553wah for ; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 07:53:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=SFUIJ+SnB81CHu20tOtR9PUJv5vDjxxTmxaR/kwg4MM=; b=sMjt+hIi3VEGzpzZYPLHrRgDu7GcJtjWdwN266/Vcc9H9TdGh9hl5eOzM6AoYvw3sHo4NQ7fOvfghoZ8dwV8VwC2lp9AlIQZP+DsPeimnWzIa47ySlWK20cIh97EtZGFOBTOYm4stqjkmDqrAqQF+tZbbH1V518dr2Ii20PyoT8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=ggE1l8mlbo3U11/ZWzRDakm6DcLqYvd+JeDswhZ0GynWTebN4xAdmufL0w6H3jhXGN92YI6e93EKaSXt03ycTRkNq86CcOFp6EJzoqFNWAyjqfZ0Jj2mJSriS7kVM7msx1MqgHYp+U6WLbNqdNYrjVTObY8WRh6Z3W7FWCdSaJ8= Received: by 10.114.160.1 with SMTP id i1mr188724wae.1189090427168; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 07:53:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.196.12 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 07:53:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709060753i4059a6ffyb9e39b9a4b85461e@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 07:53:47 -0700 From: "Mark Davis" To: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? In-Reply-To: <20070906080536.GA19523@nic.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <001701c7efed$336827a0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <20070906080536.GA19523@nic.fr> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4a932b94375c8fff X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b4a0a5f5992e2a4954405484e7717d8c Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2118614015==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============2118614015== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_36773_8167141.1189090427118" ------=_Part_36773_8167141.1189090427118 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I agree that a meeting would be good, but to maximize participation by this group, we would have one or more teleconferences instead. Mark On 9/6/07, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 11:47:24AM -0700, > Randy Presuhn wrote > a message of 21 lines which said: > > > Currently, there are no plans for a session of the ltru working > > group at that meeting. If you think that a face-to-face session > > would be helpful or necessary, please send your comments and agenda > > proposals to ltru@ietf.org for consideration. > > Reading (without giving opinions because I'm very unsure) about the > long and complicated discussion about extlangs and macrolanguages make > me believe that a face-to-face meeting would be a Good Idea: > > Agenda: > > * Agenda bashing (1 mn) > > * Extlangs and macrolanguages (50 mn) > ** What are the requirments (matching with fallback, compatibility, > staying in the spirit of ISO 639-3) > ** Solution 1 (extlang after the macrolanguage for instance "oc-prv") > ** Solution 2 (no more extlangs, all languages are created equal for > instance "prv") > ** Mixtures > > * AOB (5 mn) > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > -- Mark ------=_Part_36773_8167141.1189090427118 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I agree that a meeting would be good, but to maximize participation by this group, we would have one or more teleconferences instead.

Mark

On 9/6/07, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 11:47:24AM -0700,
Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> wrote
a message of 21 lines which said:

> Currently, there are no plans for a session of the ltru working
> group at that meeting.  If you think that a face-to-face session
> would be helpful or necessary, please send your comments and agenda
> proposals to ltru@ietf.org for consideration.

Reading (without giving opinions because I'm very unsure) about the
long and complicated discussion about extlangs and macrolanguages make
me believe that a face-to-face meeting would be a Good Idea:

Agenda:

* Agenda bashing (1 mn)

* Extlangs and macrolanguages (50 mn)
  ** What are the requirments (matching with fallback, compatibility,
     staying in the spirit of ISO 639-3)
  ** Solution 1 (extlang after the macrolanguage for instance "oc-prv")
  ** Solution 2 (no more extlangs, all languages are created equal for
     instance "prv")
  ** Mixtures

* AOB (5 mn)


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru



--
Mark ------=_Part_36773_8167141.1189090427118-- --===============2118614015== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============2118614015==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 11:23:42 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITJCn-000400-C9; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 11:23:41 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITJCm-0003zs-9y for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 11:23:40 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITJCm-0003zf-08 for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 11:23:40 -0400 Received: from rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.150]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITJCk-0002K0-ML for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 11:23:39 -0400 Received: from [10.72.77.171] (snvvpn2-10-72-77-c171.corp.yahoo.com [10.72.77.171]) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l86FNDUo023679 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 08:23:14 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dEneJwyhbruxAJ4VqDzbjcfcNIKmb2qRSKDDY0OLBWchg1mAOcihtDM9NgpOvAnN Message-ID: <46E01B61.90200@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 08:23:13 -0700 From: Addison Phillips User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Davis Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? References: <001701c7efed$336827a0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <20070906080536.GA19523@nic.fr> <30b660a20709060753i4059a6ffyb9e39b9a4b85461e@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709060753i4059a6ffyb9e39b9a4b85461e@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -15.0 (---------------) X-Scan-Signature: b4a0a5f5992e2a4954405484e7717d8c Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org +1 Mark Davis wrote: > I agree that a meeting would be good, but to maximize participation by > this group, we would have one or more teleconferences instead. > > Mark > > On 9/6/07, * Stephane Bortzmeyer* > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 11:47:24AM -0700, > Randy Presuhn > wrote > a message of 21 lines which said: > > > Currently, there are no plans for a session of the ltru working > > group at that meeting. If you think that a face-to-face session > > would be helpful or necessary, please send your comments and agenda > > proposals to ltru@ietf.org for consideration. > > Reading (without giving opinions because I'm very unsure) about the > long and complicated discussion about extlangs and macrolanguages make > me believe that a face-to-face meeting would be a Good Idea: > > Agenda: > > * Agenda bashing (1 mn) > > * Extlangs and macrolanguages (50 mn) > ** What are the requirments (matching with fallback, compatibility, > staying in the spirit of ISO 639-3) > ** Solution 1 (extlang after the macrolanguage for instance "oc-prv") > ** Solution 2 (no more extlangs, all languages are created equal for > instance "prv") > ** Mixtures > > * AOB (5 mn) > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > > > > > -- > Mark > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 11:27:02 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITJG0-0006nG-PS; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 11:27:00 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITJG0-0006jN-24 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 11:27:00 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITJFz-0006hn-Ll for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 11:26:59 -0400 Received: from mail2.sharplabs.com ([216.65.151.51]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITJFy-00067i-QF for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 11:26:59 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.sharplabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51F731E171A; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 08:27:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sharplabs.com Received: from mail2.sharplabs.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail2.sharplabs.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9utbdydm-kF1; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 08:27:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wabex1.enet.sharplabs.com (wabex1.sharpamericas.com [172.29.224.8]) by mail2.sharplabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E87811E15A9; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 08:26:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wabex2.sharpamericas.com ([172.29.224.9]) by wabex1.enet.sharplabs.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 08:26:56 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 08:26:55 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709060753i4059a6ffyb9e39b9a4b85461e@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Thread-Index: AcfwlcOpV/nl9mQ+Sme47Q5eaSkKuwADITzw From: "McDonald, Ira" To: "Mark Davis" , "Stephane Bortzmeyer" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2007 15:26:56.0711 (UTC) FILETIME=[5C469D70:01C7F09A] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2beba50d0fcdeee5f091c59f204d4365 Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1559625474==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1559625474== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C7F09A.5BBAC3B4" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C7F09A.5BBAC3B4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGksDQogDQpJIGFncmVlIHdpdGggTWFyayB0aGF0IG9uZSBvciBtb3JlIHRlbGVjb25mZXJlbmNl cyB3b3VsZCBiZSBiZXR0ZXIgZm9yDQptb3JlIHBhcnRpY2lwYXRpb24uICBUaGUgZXh0bGFuZ3Mg YW5kIG1hY3JvbGFuZ3VhZ2VzIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gaXMgDQppbXBvcnRhbnQgKGFuZCBjb25mdXNp bmcpLg0KIA0KQ2hlZXJzLA0KLSBJcmENCiANCg0KSXJhIE1jRG9uYWxkIChNdXNpY2lhbiAvIFNv ZnR3YXJlIEFyY2hpdGVjdCkNCkNoYWlyIC0gTGludXggRm91bmRhdGlvbiBPcGVuIFByaW50aW5n IFdHDQpCbHVlIFJvb2YgTXVzaWMgLyBIaWdoIE5vcnRoIEluYw0KUE8gQm94IDIyMSAgR3JhbmQg TWFyYWlzLCBNSSAgNDk4MzkNCnBob25lOiArMS05MDYtNDk0LTI0MzQNCmVtYWlsOiBpbWNkb25h bGRAc2hhcnBsYWJzLmNvbSANCg0KLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IE1h cmsgRGF2aXMgW21haWx0bzptYXJrLmRhdmlzQGljdS1wcm9qZWN0Lm9yZ10NClNlbnQ6IFRodXJz ZGF5LCBTZXB0ZW1iZXIgMDYsIDIwMDcgOTo1NCBBTQ0KVG86IFN0ZXBoYW5lIEJvcnR6bWV5ZXIN CkNjOiBMVFJVIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXANClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbTHRydV0gUmU6IDcwdGggSUVU RiAtIGx0cnUgc2Vzc2lvbj8NCg0KDQpJIGFncmVlIHRoYXQgYSBtZWV0aW5nIHdvdWxkIGJlIGdv b2QsIGJ1dCB0byBtYXhpbWl6ZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0aW9uIGJ5IHRoaXMgZ3JvdXAsIHdlIHdvdWxk IGhhdmUgb25lIG9yIG1vcmUgdGVsZWNvbmZlcmVuY2VzIGluc3RlYWQuDQoNCk1hcmsNCg0KDQpP biA5LzYvMDcsIFN0ZXBoYW5lIEJvcnR6bWV5ZXIgPCBIWVBFUkxJTksgIm1haWx0bzpib3J0em1l eWVyQG5pYy5mciJib3J0em1leWVyQG5pYy5mcj4gd3JvdGU6IA0KDQpPbiBXZWQsIFNlcCAwNSwg MjAwNyBhdCAxMTo0NzoyNEFNIC0wNzAwLA0KUmFuZHkgUHJlc3VobiA8IEhZUEVSTElOSyAibWFp bHRvOnJhbmR5X3ByZXN1aG5AbWluZHNwcmluZy5jb20icmFuZHlfcHJlc3VobkBtaW5kc3ByaW5n LmNvbT4gd3JvdGUNCmEgbWVzc2FnZSBvZiAyMSBsaW5lcyB3aGljaCBzYWlkOg0KDQo+IEN1cnJl bnRseSwgdGhlcmUgYXJlIG5vIHBsYW5zIGZvciBhIHNlc3Npb24gb2YgdGhlIGx0cnUgd29ya2lu ZyANCj4gZ3JvdXAgYXQgdGhhdCBtZWV0aW5nLiAgSWYgeW91IHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgYSBmYWNlLXRv LWZhY2Ugc2Vzc2lvbg0KPiB3b3VsZCBiZSBoZWxwZnVsIG9yIG5lY2Vzc2FyeSwgcGxlYXNlIHNl bmQgeW91ciBjb21tZW50cyBhbmQgYWdlbmRhDQo+IHByb3Bvc2FscyB0byBIWVBFUkxJTksgIm1h aWx0bzpsdHJ1QGlldGYub3JnImx0cnVAaWV0Zi5vcmcgZm9yIGNvbnNpZGVyYXRpb24uIA0KDQpS ZWFkaW5nICh3aXRob3V0IGdpdmluZyBvcGluaW9ucyBiZWNhdXNlIEknbSB2ZXJ5IHVuc3VyZSkg YWJvdXQgdGhlDQpsb25nIGFuZCBjb21wbGljYXRlZCBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIGFib3V0IGV4dGxhbmdz IGFuZCBtYWNyb2xhbmd1YWdlcyBtYWtlDQptZSBiZWxpZXZlIHRoYXQgYSBmYWNlLXRvLWZhY2Ug bWVldGluZyB3b3VsZCBiZSBhIEdvb2QgSWRlYToNCg0KQWdlbmRhOg0KDQoqIEFnZW5kYSBiYXNo aW5nICgxIG1uKQ0KDQoqIEV4dGxhbmdzIGFuZCBtYWNyb2xhbmd1YWdlcyAoNTAgbW4pDQogICoq IFdoYXQgYXJlIHRoZSByZXF1aXJtZW50cyAobWF0Y2hpbmcgd2l0aCBmYWxsYmFjaywgY29tcGF0 aWJpbGl0eSwNCiAgICAgc3RheWluZyBpbiB0aGUgc3Bpcml0IG9mIElTTyA2MzktMykNCiAgKiog U29sdXRpb24gMSAoZXh0bGFuZyBhZnRlciB0aGUgbWFjcm9sYW5ndWFnZSBmb3IgaW5zdGFuY2Ug Im9jLXBydiIpIA0KICAqKiBTb2x1dGlvbiAyIChubyBtb3JlIGV4dGxhbmdzLCBhbGwgbGFuZ3Vh Z2VzIGFyZSBjcmVhdGVkIGVxdWFsIGZvcg0KICAgICBpbnN0YW5jZSAicHJ2IikNCiAgKiogTWl4 dHVyZXMNCg0KKiBBT0IgKDUgbW4pDQoNCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCkx0cnUgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0IA0KSFlQRVJMSU5LICJtYWlsdG86 THRydUBpZXRmLm9yZyJMdHJ1QGlldGYub3JnDQpIWVBFUkxJTksgImh0dHBzOi8vd3d3MS5pZXRm Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2x0cnUiaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cxLmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4v bGlzdGluZm8vbHRydQ0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCi0tIA0KTWFyayANCg0KTm8gdmlydXMgZm91bmQgaW4g dGhpcyBvdXRnb2luZyBtZXNzYWdlLg0KQ2hlY2tlZCBieSBBVkcgRnJlZSBFZGl0aW9uLiANClZl cnNpb246IDcuNS40ODUgLyBWaXJ1cyBEYXRhYmFzZTogMjY5LjEzLjcvOTkyIC0gUmVsZWFzZSBE YXRlOiA5LzYvMjAwNyA4OjM2IEFNDQogDQo= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C7F09A.5BBAC3B4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L0VOIj4NCjxIVE1MPjxIRUFEPg0KPE1FVEEgSFRUUC1FUVVJVj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBDT05U RU5UPSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPg0KDQoNCjxNRVRBIGNvbnRlbnQ9Ik1TSFRN TCA2LjAwLjI4MDAuMTU5NyIgbmFtZT1HRU5FUkFUT1I+PC9IRUFEPg0KPEJPRFk+DQo8RElWPjxT UEFOIGNsYXNzPTIxNTQwMjMxNi0wNjA5MjAwNz48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAw ZmYgDQpzaXplPTQ+SGksPC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PFNQQU4gY2xhc3M9MjE1 NDAyMzE2LTA2MDkyMDA3PjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgY29sb3I9IzAwMDBmZiANCnNpemU9ND48 L0ZPTlQ+PC9TUEFOPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48U1BBTiBjbGFzcz0yMTU0MDIzMTYtMDYw OTIwMDc+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMGZmIHNpemU9ND5JIA0KYWdyZWUgd2l0 aCBNYXJrIHRoYXQgb25lIG9yIG1vcmUgdGVsZWNvbmZlcmVuY2VzIHdvdWxkIGJlIGJldHRlciAN CmZvcjwvRk9OVD48L1NQQU4+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxTUEFOIGNsYXNzPTIxNTQwMjMxNi0wNjA5 MjAwNz48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwZmYgc2l6ZT00Pm1vcmUgDQpwYXJ0aWNp cGF0aW9uLiZuYnNwOyBUaGUgZXh0bGFuZ3MgYW5kIG1hY3JvbGFuZ3VhZ2VzIGRpc2N1c3Npb24g aXMgDQo8L0ZPTlQ+PC9TUEFOPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48U1BBTiBjbGFzcz0yMTU0MDIzMTYtMDYw OTIwMDc+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMGZmIA0Kc2l6ZT00PmltcG9ydGFudCAo YW5kIGNvbmZ1c2luZykuPC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PFNQQU4gY2xhc3M9MjE1 NDAyMzE2LTA2MDkyMDA3PjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgY29sb3I9IzAwMDBmZiANCnNpemU9ND48 L0ZPTlQ+PC9TUEFOPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48U1BBTiBjbGFzcz0yMTU0MDIzMTYtMDYw OTIwMDc+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMGZmIA0Kc2l6ZT00PkNoZWVycyw8L0ZP TlQ+PC9TUEFOPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48U1BBTiBjbGFzcz0yMTU0MDIzMTYtMDYwOTIwMDc+PEZP TlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMGZmIHNpemU9ND4tIA0KSXJhPC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48 L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+DQo8UD48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+SXJhIE1jRG9uYWxkIChN dXNpY2lhbiAvIFNvZnR3YXJlIEFyY2hpdGVjdCk8QlI+Q2hhaXIgLSBMaW51eCANCkZvdW5kYXRp b24gT3BlbiBQcmludGluZyBXRzxCUj5CbHVlIFJvb2YgTXVzaWMgLyBIaWdoIE5vcnRoIEluYzxC Uj5QTyBCb3ggDQoyMjEmbmJzcDsgR3JhbmQgTWFyYWlzLCBNSSZuYnNwOyA0OTgzOTxCUj5waG9u ZTogKzEtOTA2LTQ5NC0yNDM0PEJSPmVtYWlsOiANCmltY2RvbmFsZEBzaGFycGxhYnMuY29tPC9G T05UPiA8L1A+DQo8RElWIGNsYXNzPU91dGxvb2tNZXNzYWdlSGVhZGVyIGRpcj1sdHIgYWxpZ249 bGVmdD48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPVRhaG9tYSANCnNpemU9Mj4tLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0t LTxCUj48Qj5Gcm9tOjwvQj4gTWFyayBEYXZpcyANClttYWlsdG86bWFyay5kYXZpc0BpY3UtcHJv amVjdC5vcmddPEJSPjxCPlNlbnQ6PC9CPiBUaHVyc2RheSwgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDA2LCAyMDA3IA0K OTo1NCBBTTxCUj48Qj5Ubzo8L0I+IFN0ZXBoYW5lIEJvcnR6bWV5ZXI8QlI+PEI+Q2M6PC9CPiBM VFJVIFdvcmtpbmcgDQpHcm91cDxCUj48Qj5TdWJqZWN0OjwvQj4gUmU6IFtMdHJ1XSBSZTogNzB0 aCBJRVRGIC0gbHRydSANCnNlc3Npb24/PEJSPjxCUj48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+SSBhZ3JlZSB0aGF0 IGEgbWVldGluZyB3b3VsZCBiZSBnb29kLCBidXQgdG8gDQptYXhpbWl6ZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0aW9u IGJ5IHRoaXMgZ3JvdXAsIHdlIHdvdWxkIGhhdmUgb25lIG9yIG1vcmUgdGVsZWNvbmZlcmVuY2Vz IA0KaW5zdGVhZC48QlI+PEJSPk1hcms8QlI+PEJSPg0KPERJVj48U1BBTiBjbGFzcz1nbWFpbF9x dW90ZT5PbiA5LzYvMDcsIDxCIGNsYXNzPWdtYWlsX3NlbmRlcm5hbWU+U3RlcGhhbmUgDQpCb3J0 em1leWVyPC9CPiAmbHQ7PEEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmJvcnR6bWV5ZXJAbmljLmZyIj5ib3J0em1l eWVyQG5pYy5mcjwvQT4mZ3Q7IA0Kd3JvdGU6PC9TUEFOPg0KPEJMT0NLUVVPVEUgY2xhc3M9Z21h aWxfcXVvdGUgDQpzdHlsZT0iUEFERElORy1MRUZUOiAxZXg7IE1BUkdJTjogMHB0IDBwdCAwcHQg MC44ZXg7IEJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiByZ2IoMjA0LDIwNCwyMDQpIDFweCBzb2xpZCI+T24gDQogIFdl ZCwgU2VwIDA1LCAyMDA3IGF0IDExOjQ3OjI0QU0gLTA3MDAsPEJSPlJhbmR5IFByZXN1aG4gJmx0 OzxBIA0KICBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86cmFuZHlfcHJlc3VobkBtaW5kc3ByaW5nLmNvbSI+cmFuZHlf cHJlc3VobkBtaW5kc3ByaW5nLmNvbTwvQT4mZ3Q7IA0KICB3cm90ZTxCUj5hIG1lc3NhZ2Ugb2Yg MjEgbGluZXMgd2hpY2ggc2FpZDo8QlI+PEJSPiZndDsgQ3VycmVudGx5LCB0aGVyZSBhcmUgbm8g DQogIHBsYW5zIGZvciBhIHNlc3Npb24gb2YgdGhlIGx0cnUgd29ya2luZyA8QlI+Jmd0OyBncm91 cCBhdCB0aGF0IA0KICBtZWV0aW5nLiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwO0lmIHlvdSB0aGluayB0aGF0IGEgZmFj ZS10by1mYWNlIHNlc3Npb248QlI+Jmd0OyB3b3VsZCBiZSANCiAgaGVscGZ1bCBvciBuZWNlc3Nh cnksIHBsZWFzZSBzZW5kIHlvdXIgY29tbWVudHMgYW5kIGFnZW5kYTxCUj4mZ3Q7IHByb3Bvc2Fs cyANCiAgdG8gPEEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmx0cnVAaWV0Zi5vcmciPmx0cnVAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L0E+ IGZvciBjb25zaWRlcmF0aW9uLiANCiAgPEJSPjxCUj5SZWFkaW5nICh3aXRob3V0IGdpdmluZyBv cGluaW9ucyBiZWNhdXNlIEknbSB2ZXJ5IHVuc3VyZSkgYWJvdXQgDQogIHRoZTxCUj5sb25nIGFu ZCBjb21wbGljYXRlZCBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIGFib3V0IGV4dGxhbmdzIGFuZCBtYWNyb2xhbmd1YWdl cyANCiAgbWFrZTxCUj5tZSBiZWxpZXZlIHRoYXQgYSBmYWNlLXRvLWZhY2UgbWVldGluZyB3b3Vs ZCBiZSBhIEdvb2QgDQogIElkZWE6PEJSPjxCUj5BZ2VuZGE6PEJSPjxCUj4qIEFnZW5kYSBiYXNo aW5nICgxIG1uKTxCUj48QlI+KiBFeHRsYW5ncyBhbmQgDQogIG1hY3JvbGFuZ3VhZ2VzICg1MCBt bik8QlI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7KiogV2hhdCBhcmUgdGhlIHJlcXVpcm1lbnRzIChtYXRjaGluZyAN CiAgd2l0aCBmYWxsYmFjaywgY29tcGF0aWJpbGl0eSw8QlI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5i c3A7IHN0YXlpbmcgaW4gdGhlIA0KICBzcGlyaXQgb2YgSVNPIDYzOS0zKTxCUj4mbmJzcDsmbmJz cDsqKiBTb2x1dGlvbiAxIChleHRsYW5nIGFmdGVyIHRoZSANCiAgbWFjcm9sYW5ndWFnZSBmb3Ig aW5zdGFuY2UgIm9jLXBydiIpIDxCUj4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsqKiBTb2x1dGlvbiAyIChubyBtb3Jl IA0KICBleHRsYW5ncywgYWxsIGxhbmd1YWdlcyBhcmUgY3JlYXRlZCBlcXVhbCBmb3I8QlI+Jm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IA0KICBpbnN0YW5jZSAicHJ2Iik8QlI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 KiogTWl4dHVyZXM8QlI+PEJSPiogQU9CICg1IA0KICBtbik8QlI+PEJSPjxCUj5fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXzxCUj5MdHJ1IG1haWxpbmcgDQog IGxpc3QgPEJSPjxBIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpMdHJ1QGlldGYub3JnIj5MdHJ1QGlldGYub3JnPC9B PjxCUj48QSANCiAgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cxLmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8v bHRydSI+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cxLmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbHRydTwvQT48QlI+ PC9CTE9DS1FVT1RFPjwvRElWPjxCUj48QlIgDQpjbGVhcj1hbGw+PEJSPi0tIDxCUj5NYXJrIDwv Qk9EWT48L0hUTUw+DQo8QlI+DQoNCjxQPjxGT05UIFNJWkU9Mj5ObyB2aXJ1cyBmb3VuZCBpbiB0 aGlzIG91dGdvaW5nIG1lc3NhZ2UuPEJSPg0KQ2hlY2tlZCBieSBBVkcgRnJlZSBFZGl0aW9uLjxC Uj4NClZlcnNpb246IDcuNS40ODUgLyBWaXJ1cyBEYXRhYmFzZTogMjY5LjEzLjcvOTkyIC0gUmVs ZWFzZSBEYXRlOiA5LzYvMjAwNyA4OjM2IEFNPEJSPg0KPC9GT05UPiA8L1A+DQo= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C7F09A.5BBAC3B4-- --===============1559625474== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============1559625474==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 14:09:14 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITLmz-0004hj-Aj; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:09:13 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITLmy-0004hJ-5o for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:09:12 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITLmx-0004hB-RY for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:09:11 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.64]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITLmx-00025Q-Fh for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:09:11 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=nuqCKqq3dx2iA22psm4PztMa0bX7PRKUb01u71vG5YzUh8CYOS3JCzCUe8nCIG2/; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [66.167.204.92] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ITLmw-0001FE-L4 for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:09:11 -0400 Message-ID: <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" To: "LTRU Working Group" References: Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 11:11:57 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888fa44b31bb60a93566b8ce9b639e5f6ebcefa7f62b847e89e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 66.167.204.92 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi - > From: "McDonald, Ira" > To: "Mark Davis" ; "Stephane Bortzmeyer" > Cc: "LTRU Working Group" > Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 8:26 AM > Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? ... > I agree with Mark that one or more teleconferences would be better for > more participation. The extlangs and macrolanguages discussion is > important (and confusing). ... There seems to be some interest in a teleconference instead of WG session in Vancouver. If we go that route, we should do so quickly. Does anyone have the resources and willingness to actually set up a teleconference? Randy _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 15:15:44 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITMpK-00050U-NB; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:15:42 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITMpB-0004fw-U7 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:15:33 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITMpB-0004fg-2T; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:15:33 -0400 Received: from ns3.neustar.com ([156.154.24.138]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITMpA-0003UG-IW; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:15:32 -0400 Received: from stiedprstage1.ietf.org (stiedprstage1.va.neustar.com [10.31.47.10]) by ns3.neustar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 388E8175A7; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 19:15:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ietf by stiedprstage1.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITMof-00082p-Os; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:15:01 -0400 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:15:01 -0400 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 73734d43604d52d23b3eba644a169745 Cc: ltru@ietf.org Subject: [Ltru] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.txt X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Language Tag Registry Update Working Group of the IETF. Title : Update to the Language Subtag Registry Author(s) : D. Ewell Filename : draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.txt Pages : 932 Date : 2007-9-6 This memo defines the procedure used to update the IANA Language Subtag Registry in conjunction with the publication of RFC 4646bis [RFC EDITOR NOTE: replace with actual RFC number], for use in forming tags for identifying languages. As an Internet-Draft, it also contained a complete replacement of the contents of the Registry to be used by IANA in updating it. To prevent confusion, this material was removed before publication. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2007-9-6144326.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2007-9-6144326.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --NextPart-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 17:17:04 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITOil-0007CS-7y; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:17:03 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITOik-0007CM-EW for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:17:02 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITOik-0007CE-4H for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:17:02 -0400 Received: from rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.150]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITOij-0007t7-I4 for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:17:01 -0400 Received: from [172.21.37.80] (duringperson-lx.corp.yahoo.com [172.21.37.80]) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l86LGneR060948 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 14:16:50 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Di/pJwqBWW58r9cEYefkbut5PlIDpNWWvFQKC9vXCBistlBP7Dae6zgGe401Q6gr Message-ID: <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:16:49 -0700 From: Addison Phillips User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Randy Presuhn Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? References: <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> In-Reply-To: <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -15.0 (---------------) X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352 Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Yes, I can set one up and would be happy to do so. I'll be traveling for the next two weeks, however, so sometime during the week of the 24th would be my next optimal participation time. Addison -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. Randy Presuhn wrote: > Hi - > >> From: "McDonald, Ira" >> To: "Mark Davis" ; "Stephane Bortzmeyer" >> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" >> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 8:26 AM >> Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? > ... >> I agree with Mark that one or more teleconferences would be better for >> more participation. The extlangs and macrolanguages discussion is >> important (and confusing). > ... > > There seems to be some interest in a teleconference instead of > WG session in Vancouver. If we go that route, we should do > so quickly. Does anyone have the resources and willingness > to actually set up a teleconference? > > Randy > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 17:46:32 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPBI-0001Yg-HA; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:46:32 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPBH-0001YN-0Y for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:46:31 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPBG-0001YF-N8 for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:46:30 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.177]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPBD-0004n2-PA for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:46:30 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k40so451767wah for ; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:46:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=bKeL6PVssEv3DmCHE4ZStBTVnHzbyiEhWjosUTNec/0=; b=uWL8HNQ0yk1zQwVUzq65m7t6qMgQAkGQS9ox8ePA6hQW1NXvXIzBxaXEL7UOmX+WPecqiNEZA7C2g75wpjDL1oOmpwgkXut0OPV6qe0npmvGqt94Zdv77J0vzToL8bU8bgZaQ7SzEJiuFZ9Z+KeiFK2CA9plVVos3j34q3J8QYM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=A/YrsCxUjK7V3OvA0YRiDsBjhJQYahm5EY8qFmlO41Qs5eUd1K5YUYEnc8lBiNjSEuZ8vspGRfwcyfN/Nd8jWtJ4VEwzVfhQmpWDp0CrzPND6QSzlPQ8pb4m6qgq/UFXyBIS7j2ffwjZirmTt+7QjXfmqVcbBPYfVzvP5piqmGo= Received: by 10.115.90.1 with SMTP id s1mr136207wal.1189115186630; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.196.12 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 14:46:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 14:46:26 -0700 From: "Mark Davis" To: "Addison Phillips" Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? In-Reply-To: <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 9d968cad8e8f8529 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 10ba05e7e8a9aa6adb025f426bef3a30 Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1565416410==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============1565416410== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_41076_7381678.1189115186506" ------=_Part_41076_7381678.1189115186506 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific Time. http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 Mark On 9/6/07, Addison Phillips wrote: > > Yes, I can set one up and would be happy to do so. > > I'll be traveling for the next two weeks, however, so sometime during > the week of the 24th would be my next optimal participation time. > > Addison > > -- > Addison Phillips > Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. > Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG > > Internationalization is an architecture. > It is not a feature. > > > Randy Presuhn wrote: > > Hi - > > > >> From: "McDonald, Ira" > >> To: "Mark Davis" ; "Stephane Bortzmeyer" < > bortzmeyer@nic.fr> > >> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" > >> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 8:26 AM > >> Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? > > ... > >> I agree with Mark that one or more teleconferences would be better for > >> more participation. The extlangs and macrolanguages discussion is > >> important (and confusing). > > ... > > > > There seems to be some interest in a teleconference instead of > > WG session in Vancouver. If we go that route, we should do > > so quickly. Does anyone have the resources and willingness > > to actually set up a teleconference? > > > > Randy > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ltru mailing list > > Ltru@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > -- Mark ------=_Part_41076_7381678.1189115186506 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific Time.

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224

Mark

On 9/6/07, Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
Yes, I can set one up and would be happy to do so.

I'll be traveling for the next two weeks, however, so sometime during
the week of the 24th would be my next optimal participation time.

Addison

--
Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.
Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.


Randy Presuhn wrote:
> Hi -
>
>> From: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
>> To: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org >; "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
>> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 8:26 AM
>> Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session?
> ...
>> I agree with Mark that one or more teleconferences would be better for
>> more participation.  The extlangs and macrolanguages discussion is
>> important (and confusing).
> ...
>
> There seems to be some interest in a teleconference instead of
> WG session in Vancouver.  If we go that route, we should do
> so quickly.  Does anyone have the resources and willingness
> to actually set up a teleconference?
>
> Randy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru



_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru



--
Mark ------=_Part_41076_7381678.1189115186506-- --===============1565416410== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============1565416410==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 17:50:11 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPEo-0002ki-Q4; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:50:10 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPEn-0002kd-9O for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:50:09 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPEm-0002kV-Va for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:50:09 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPEm-0000Uv-Mk for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:50:08 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1ITPEl-0004yT-2P; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:50:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 17:50:07 -0400 To: Mark Davis Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Message-ID: <20070906215006.GB31861@mercury.ccil.org> References: <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d17f825e43c9aed4fd65b7edddddec89 Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mark Davis scripsit: > How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific Time. All good for me except 8 am Wednesday (XML Core WG) and 9 am Friday. -- John Cowan http://ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org Lope de Vega: "It wonders me I can speak at all. Some caitiff rogue did rudely yerk me on the knob, wherefrom my wits still wander." An Englishman: "Ay, a filchman to the nab betimes 'll leave a man crank for a spell." --Harry Turtledove, Ruled Britannia _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 18:25:48 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPnD-0005Px-O2; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:25:43 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPnC-0005Pn-Tk for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:25:42 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPnC-0005Pf-BM for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:25:42 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.70]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITPnB-0001JC-VJ for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:25:42 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=L3pJDSOZe8yyPWx6gjEBG45dpmiESpghYOr2xIfLqLA8P8zyrr98h3XPMPh6GMTa; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [64.105.35.16] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ITPnB-0008TC-5D for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:25:41 -0400 Message-ID: <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" To: "LTRU Working Group" References: <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 15:28:28 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888fa44b31bb60a9356e1d79809cf064170177c35794b3b1bab350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 64.105.35.16 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi - > From: "Mark Davis" > To: "Addison Phillips" > Cc: "Randy Presuhn" ; "LTRU Working Group" > Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 2:46 PM > Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? > > How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific Time. > > http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 ... Any of those would work for me, but Wednesday would be best, because it would give us time to follow up on the WG mailing list to determine whether we need to request a slot for a session in Vancouver. Randy _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 18:48:41 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITQ9Q-0002I5-Fs; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:48:40 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITQ9O-0002Hz-U9 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:48:38 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITQ9O-0002Hq-Gw for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:48:38 -0400 Received: from mailc.microsoft.com ([131.107.115.214] helo=smtp.microsoft.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITQ9N-0002Xc-L8 for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:48:38 -0400 Received: from tk1-exhub-c103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.56.116.114) by TK5-EXGWY-E803.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.169) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.177.2; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 15:48:36 -0700 Received: from NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.62.44]) by tk1-exhub-c103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.56.116.114]) with mapi; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 15:48:36 -0700 From: Peter Constable To: Mark Davis , Addison Phillips Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 15:48:33 -0700 Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Thread-Topic: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Thread-Index: Acfwz2UlqosgkCsxS/e0fr+5VDERvAACIFqA Message-ID: References: <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2bf730a014b318fd3efd65b39b48818c Cc: LTRU Working Group X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0967409620==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============0967409620== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561ABEF6F23NAEXMSGC117re_" --_000_DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561ABEF6F23NAEXMSGC117re_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SeKAmWxsIGJlIGF0IHRoZSB0YWlsIGVuZCBvZiBhIHRyaXAgdG8gQ2hpbmEgdGhhdCB3ZWVrLg0K DQoNClBldGVyDQoNCkZyb206IE1hcmsgRGF2aXMgW21haWx0bzptYXJrLmRhdmlzQGljdS1wcm9q ZWN0Lm9yZ10NClNlbnQ6IFRodXJzZGF5LCBTZXB0ZW1iZXIgMDYsIDIwMDcgMjo0NiBQTQ0KVG86 IEFkZGlzb24gUGhpbGxpcHMNCkNjOiBMVFJVIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXANClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBb THRydV0gUmU6IDcwdGggSUVURiAtIGx0cnUgc2Vzc2lvbj8NCg0KSG93IGFib3V0IFdlZCwgVGh1 LCBvciBGcmkgb2YgdGhhdCB3ZWVrLCBhdCA4OjAwIG9yIDk6MDAgYW0gUGFjaWZpYyBUaW1lLg0K DQpodHRwOi8vd3d3LnRpbWVhbmRkYXRlLmNvbS93b3JsZGNsb2NrL2ZpeGVkdGltZS5odG1sP21v bnRoPTkmZGF5PTI2JnllYXI9MjAwNyZob3VyPTkmbWluPTAmc2VjPTAmcDE9MjI0DQoNCk1hcmsN Ck9uIDkvNi8wNywgQWRkaXNvbiBQaGlsbGlwcyA8YWRkaXNvbkB5YWhvby1pbmMuY29tPG1haWx0 bzphZGRpc29uQHlhaG9vLWluYy5jb20+PiB3cm90ZToNClllcywgSSBjYW4gc2V0IG9uZSB1cCBh bmQgd291bGQgYmUgaGFwcHkgdG8gZG8gc28uDQoNCkknbGwgYmUgdHJhdmVsaW5nIGZvciB0aGUg bmV4dCB0d28gd2Vla3MsIGhvd2V2ZXIsIHNvIHNvbWV0aW1lIGR1cmluZw0KdGhlIHdlZWsgb2Yg dGhlIDI0dGggd291bGQgYmUgbXkgbmV4dCBvcHRpbWFsIHBhcnRpY2lwYXRpb24gdGltZS4NCg0K QWRkaXNvbg0KDQotLQ0KQWRkaXNvbiBQaGlsbGlwcw0KR2xvYmFsaXphdGlvbiBBcmNoaXRlY3Qg LS0gWWFob28hIEluYy4NCkNoYWlyIC0tIFczQyBJbnRlcm5hdGlvbmFsaXphdGlvbiBDb3JlIFdH DQoNCkludGVybmF0aW9uYWxpemF0aW9uIGlzIGFuIGFyY2hpdGVjdHVyZS4NCkl0IGlzIG5vdCBh IGZlYXR1cmUuDQoNCg0KUmFuZHkgUHJlc3VobiB3cm90ZToNCj4gSGkgLQ0KPg0KPj4gRnJvbTog Ik1jRG9uYWxkLCBJcmEiIDxpbWNkb25hbGRAc2hhcnBsYWJzLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86aW1jZG9uYWxk QHNoYXJwbGFicy5jb20+Pg0KPj4gVG86ICJNYXJrIERhdmlzIiA8bWFyay5kYXZpc0BpY3UtcHJv amVjdC5vcmcgPG1haWx0bzptYXJrLmRhdmlzQGljdS1wcm9qZWN0Lm9yZz4gPjsgIlN0ZXBoYW5l IEJvcnR6bWV5ZXIiIDxib3J0em1leWVyQG5pYy5mcjxtYWlsdG86Ym9ydHptZXllckBuaWMuZnI+ Pg0KPj4gQ2M6ICJMVFJVIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAiIDxsdHJ1QGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpsdHJ1 QGlldGYub3JnPj4NCj4+IFNlbnQ6IFRodXJzZGF5LCBTZXB0ZW1iZXIgMDYsIDIwMDcgODoyNiBB TQ0KPj4gU3ViamVjdDogUkU6IFtMdHJ1XSBSZTogNzB0aCBJRVRGIC0gbHRydSBzZXNzaW9uPw0K PiAuLi4NCj4+IEkgYWdyZWUgd2l0aCBNYXJrIHRoYXQgb25lIG9yIG1vcmUgdGVsZWNvbmZlcmVu Y2VzIHdvdWxkIGJlIGJldHRlciBmb3INCj4+IG1vcmUgcGFydGljaXBhdGlvbi4gIFRoZSBleHRs YW5ncyBhbmQgbWFjcm9sYW5ndWFnZXMgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBpcw0KPj4gaW1wb3J0YW50IChhbmQg Y29uZnVzaW5nKS4NCj4gLi4uDQo+DQo+IFRoZXJlIHNlZW1zIHRvIGJlIHNvbWUgaW50ZXJlc3Qg aW4gYSB0ZWxlY29uZmVyZW5jZSBpbnN0ZWFkIG9mDQo+IFdHIHNlc3Npb24gaW4gVmFuY291dmVy LiAgSWYgd2UgZ28gdGhhdCByb3V0ZSwgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGRvDQo+IHNvIHF1aWNrbHkuICBEb2Vz IGFueW9uZSBoYXZlIHRoZSByZXNvdXJjZXMgYW5kIHdpbGxpbmduZXNzDQo+IHRvIGFjdHVhbGx5 IHNldCB1cCBhIHRlbGVjb25mZXJlbmNlPw0KPg0KPiBSYW5keQ0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPiBfX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPiBMdHJ1IG1haWxpbmcg bGlzdA0KPiBMdHJ1QGlldGYub3JnIDxtYWlsdG86THRydUBpZXRmLm9yZz4NCj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93 d3cxLmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbHRydQ0KDQoNCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCkx0cnUgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQpMdHJ1 QGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpMdHJ1QGlldGYub3JnPg0KaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cxLmlldGYub3JnL21h aWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbHRydQ0KDQoNCg0KLS0NCk1hcmsNCg== --_000_DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561ABEF6F23NAEXMSGC117re_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6eD0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9z b2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6ZXhjZWwiIHhtbG5zOnA9InVybjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206 b2ZmaWNlOnBvd2VycG9pbnQiIHhtbG5zOmE9InVybjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2Zm aWNlOmFjY2VzcyIgeG1sbnM6ZHQ9InV1aWQ6QzJGNDEwMTAtNjVCMy0xMWQxLUEyOUYtMDBBQTAw QzE0ODgyIiB4bWxuczpzPSJ1dWlkOkJEQzZFM0YwLTZEQTMtMTFkMS1BMkEzLTAwQUEwMEMxNDg4 MiIgeG1sbnM6cnM9InVybjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206cm93c2V0IiB4bWxuczp6PSIj Um93c2V0U2NoZW1hIiB4bWxuczpiPSJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTpw dWJsaXNoZXIiIHhtbG5zOnNzPSJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTpzcHJl YWRzaGVldCIgeG1sbnM6Yz0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6Y29tcG9u ZW50OnNwcmVhZHNoZWV0IiB4bWxuczpvYT0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZp Y2U6YWN0aXZhdGlvbiIgeG1sbnM6aHRtbD0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcvVFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0 MCIgeG1sbnM6cT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMueG1sc29hcC5vcmcvc29hcC9lbnZlbG9wZS8iIHht bG5zOkQ9IkRBVjoiIHhtbG5zOngyPSJodHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL29mZmlj ZS9leGNlbC8yMDAzL3htbCIgeG1sbnM6b2lzPSJodHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29t L3NoYXJlcG9pbnQvc29hcC9vaXMvIiB4bWxuczpkaXI9Imh0dHA6Ly9zY2hlbWFzLm1pY3Jvc29m dC5jb20vc2hhcmVwb2ludC9zb2FwL2RpcmVjdG9yeS8iIHhtbG5zOmRzPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3Lncz Lm9yZy8yMDAwLzA5L3htbGRzaWcjIiB4bWxuczpkc3A9Imh0dHA6Ly9zY2hlbWFzLm1pY3Jvc29m dC5jb20vc2hhcmVwb2ludC9kc3AiIHhtbG5zOnVkYz0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWljcm9zb2Z0 LmNvbS9kYXRhL3VkYyIgeG1sbnM6eHNkPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy8yMDAxL1hNTFNjaGVt YSIgeG1sbnM6c3BzPSJodHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL3NoYXJlcG9pbnQvc29h cC8iIHhtbG5zOnhzaT0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcvMjAwMS9YTUxTY2hlbWEtaW5zdGFuY2Ui IHhtbG5zOnVkY3hmPSJodHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL2RhdGEvdWRjL3htbGZp bGUiIHhtbG5zOndmPSJodHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL3NoYXJlcG9pbnQvc29h cC93b3JrZmxvdy8iIHhtbG5zOm12ZXI9Imh0dHA6Ly9zY2hlbWFzLm9wZW54bWxmb3JtYXRzLm9y Zy9tYXJrdXAtY29tcGF0aWJpbGl0eS8yMDA2IiB4bWxuczptPSJodHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNy b3NvZnQuY29tL29mZmljZS8yMDA0LzEyL29tbWwiIHhtbG5zOm1yZWxzPSJodHRwOi8vc2NoZW1h cy5vcGVueG1sZm9ybWF0cy5vcmcvcGFja2FnZS8yMDA2L3JlbGF0aW9uc2hpcHMiIHhtbG5zOmV4 MTJ0PSJodHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL2V4Y2hhbmdlL3NlcnZpY2VzLzIwMDYv dHlwZXMiIHhtbG5zOmV4MTJtPSJodHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL2V4Y2hhbmdl L3NlcnZpY2VzLzIwMDYvbWVzc2FnZXMiIHhtbG5zPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy9UUi9SRUMt aHRtbDQwIj4NCg0KPGhlYWQ+DQo8bWV0YSBodHRwLWVxdWl2PUNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSBjb250ZW50 PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPg0KPG1ldGEgbmFtZT1HZW5lcmF0b3IgY29udGVu dD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTIgKGZpbHRlcmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPHN0eWxlPg0KPCEtLQ0K IC8qIEZvbnQgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCiBAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYW1i cmlhIE1hdGgiOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgNCA1IDMgNSA0IDYgMyAyIDQ7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0K CXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJpOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgMTUgNSAyIDIgMiA0IDMgMiA0O30N CkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6VGFob21hOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgMTEgNiA0IDMg NSA0IDQgMiA0O30NCiAvKiBTdHlsZSBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KIHAuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBsaS5N c29Ob3JtYWwsIGRpdi5Nc29Ob3JtYWwNCgl7bWFyZ2luOjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOi4w MDAxcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjEyLjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFu Iiwic2VyaWYiO30NCmE6bGluaywgc3Bhbi5Nc29IeXBlcmxpbmsNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9y aXR5Ojk5Ow0KCWNvbG9yOmJsdWU7DQoJdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0aW9uOnVuZGVybGluZTt9DQphOnZp c2l0ZWQsIHNwYW4uTXNvSHlwZXJsaW5rRm9sbG93ZWQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5 Ow0KCWNvbG9yOnB1cnBsZTsNCgl0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30NCnNwYW4uZ21h aWxxdW90ZQ0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtbmFtZTpnbWFpbF9xdW90ZTt9DQpzcGFuLkVtYWlsU3R5bGUx OA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtdHlwZTpwZXJzb25hbC1yZXBseTsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJy aSIsInNhbnMtc2VyaWYiOw0KCWNvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0Q7fQ0KLk1zb0NocERlZmF1bHQNCgl7bXNv LXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6ZXhwb3J0LW9ubHk7fQ0KQHBhZ2UgU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7c2l6ZTo4LjVpbiAx MS4waW47DQoJbWFyZ2luOjEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluO30NCmRpdi5TZWN0aW9uMQ0K CXtwYWdlOlNlY3Rpb24xO30NCi0tPg0KPC9zdHlsZT4NCjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48eG1s Pg0KIDxvOnNoYXBlZGVmYXVsdHMgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiIHNwaWRtYXg9IjEwMjYiIC8+DQo8L3ht bD48IVtlbmRpZl0tLT48IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+PHhtbD4NCiA8bzpzaGFwZWxheW91dCB2 OmV4dD0iZWRpdCI+DQogIDxvOmlkbWFwIHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0IiBkYXRhPSIxIiAvPg0KIDwvbzpz aGFwZWxheW91dD48L3htbD48IVtlbmRpZl0tLT4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCg0KPGJvZHkgbGFuZz1FTi1V UyBsaW5rPWJsdWUgdmxpbms9cHVycGxlPg0KDQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPVNlY3Rpb24xPg0KDQo8cCBj bGFzcz1Nc29Ob3JtYWw+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9J2ZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 IkNhbGlicmkiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjsNCmNvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QnPknigJlsbCBiZSBhdCB0aGUg dGFpbCBlbmQgb2YgYSB0cmlwIHRvIENoaW5hIHRoYXQgd2Vlay48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48 L3A+DQoNCjxwIGNsYXNzPU1zb05vcm1hbD48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0nZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtm b250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsInNhbnMtc2VyaWYiOw0KY29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCc+PG86cD4m bmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KDQo8cCBjbGFzcz1Nc29Ob3JtYWw+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 J2ZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjsNCmNv bG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QnPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNv Tm9ybWFsPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSdmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJp Iiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7DQpjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEJz5QZXRlcjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwv cD4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSdmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2Zv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7DQpjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEJz48bzpwPiZu YnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQoNCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9J2JvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci1s ZWZ0OnNvbGlkIGJsdWUgMS41cHQ7cGFkZGluZzowaW4gMGluIDBpbiA0LjBwdCc+DQoNCjxkaXY+ DQoNCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9J2JvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci10b3A6c29saWQgI0I1QzRERiAxLjBw dDtwYWRkaW5nOjMuMHB0IDBpbiAwaW4gMGluJz4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPjxiPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSdmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJUYWhvbWEiLCJzYW5zLXNl cmlmIic+RnJvbTo8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxzcGFuDQpzdHlsZT0nZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250 LWZhbWlseToiVGFob21hIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiInPiBNYXJrIERhdmlzDQpbbWFpbHRvOm1hcmsu ZGF2aXNAaWN1LXByb2plY3Qub3JnXSA8YnI+DQo8Yj5TZW50OjwvYj4gVGh1cnNkYXksIFNlcHRl bWJlciAwNiwgMjAwNyAyOjQ2IFBNPGJyPg0KPGI+VG86PC9iPiBBZGRpc29uIFBoaWxsaXBzPGJy Pg0KPGI+Q2M6PC9iPiBMVFJVIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXA8YnI+DQo8Yj5TdWJqZWN0OjwvYj4gUmU6 IFtMdHJ1XSBSZTogNzB0aCBJRVRGIC0gbHRydSBzZXNzaW9uPzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwv cD4NCg0KPC9kaXY+DQoNCjwvZGl2Pg0KDQo8cCBjbGFzcz1Nc29Ob3JtYWw+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8 L286cD48L3A+DQoNCjxwIGNsYXNzPU1zb05vcm1hbCBzdHlsZT0nbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbToxMi4w cHQnPkhvdyBhYm91dCBXZWQsIFRodSwgb3IgRnJpIG9mDQp0aGF0IHdlZWssIGF0IDg6MDAgb3Ig OTowMCBhbSBQYWNpZmljIFRpbWUuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGENCmhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cudGlt ZWFuZGRhdGUuY29tL3dvcmxkY2xvY2svZml4ZWR0aW1lLmh0bWw/bW9udGg9OSZhbXA7ZGF5PTI2 JmFtcDt5ZWFyPTIwMDcmYW1wO2hvdXI9OSZhbXA7bWluPTAmYW1wO3NlYz0wJmFtcDtwMT0yMjQi Pmh0dHA6Ly93d3cudGltZWFuZGRhdGUuY29tL3dvcmxkY2xvY2svZml4ZWR0aW1lLmh0bWw/bW9u dGg9OSZhbXA7ZGF5PTI2JmFtcDt5ZWFyPTIwMDcmYW1wO2hvdXI9OSZhbXA7bWluPTAmYW1wO3Nl Yz0wJmFtcDtwMT0yMjQNCjwvYT48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpNYXJrPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQoNCjxk aXY+DQoNCjxwIGNsYXNzPU1zb05vcm1hbD48c3BhbiBjbGFzcz1nbWFpbHF1b3RlPk9uIDkvNi8w NywgPGI+QWRkaXNvbiBQaGlsbGlwczwvYj4NCiZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86YWRkaXNvbkB5 YWhvby1pbmMuY29tIj5hZGRpc29uQHlhaG9vLWluYy5jb208L2E+Jmd0OyB3cm90ZTo8L3NwYW4+ PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQoNCjxwIGNsYXNzPU1zb05vcm1hbD5ZZXMsIEkgY2FuIHNldCBvbmUg dXAgYW5kIHdvdWxkIGJlIGhhcHB5IHRvIGRvIHNvLjxicj4NCjxicj4NCkknbGwgYmUgdHJhdmVs aW5nIGZvciB0aGUgbmV4dCB0d28gd2Vla3MsIGhvd2V2ZXIsIHNvIHNvbWV0aW1lIGR1cmluZzxi cj4NCnRoZSB3ZWVrIG9mIHRoZSAyNHRoIHdvdWxkIGJlIG15IG5leHQgb3B0aW1hbCBwYXJ0aWNp cGF0aW9uIHRpbWUuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KQWRkaXNvbjxicj4NCjxicj4NCi0tPGJyPg0KQWRkaXNv biBQaGlsbGlwczxicj4NCkdsb2JhbGl6YXRpb24gQXJjaGl0ZWN0IC0tIFlhaG9vISBJbmMuPGJy Pg0KQ2hhaXIgLS0gVzNDIEludGVybmF0aW9uYWxpemF0aW9uIENvcmUgV0c8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpJ bnRlcm5hdGlvbmFsaXphdGlvbiBpcyBhbiBhcmNoaXRlY3R1cmUuPGJyPg0KSXQgaXMgbm90IGEg ZmVhdHVyZS48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpSYW5keSBQcmVzdWhuIHdyb3RlOjxicj4NCiZndDsg SGkgLSA8YnI+DQomZ3Q7PGJyPg0KJmd0OyZndDsgRnJvbTogJnF1b3Q7TWNEb25hbGQsIElyYSZx dW90OyAmbHQ7PGENCmhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzppbWNkb25hbGRAc2hhcnBsYWJzLmNvbSI+aW1jZG9u YWxkQHNoYXJwbGFicy5jb208L2E+Jmd0Ozxicj4NCiZndDsmZ3Q7IFRvOiAmcXVvdDtNYXJrIERh dmlzJnF1b3Q7ICZsdDs8YQ0KaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOm1hcmsuZGF2aXNAaWN1LXByb2plY3Qub3Jn Ij5tYXJrLmRhdmlzQGljdS1wcm9qZWN0Lm9yZyA8L2E+Jmd0OzsNCiZxdW90O1N0ZXBoYW5lIEJv cnR6bWV5ZXImcXVvdDsgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpib3J0em1leWVyQG5pYy5mciI+Ym9y dHptZXllckBuaWMuZnI8L2E+Jmd0Ozxicj4NCiZndDsmZ3Q7IENjOiAmcXVvdDtMVFJVIFdvcmtp bmcgR3JvdXAmcXVvdDsgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpsdHJ1QGlldGYub3JnIj5sdHJ1QGll dGYub3JnPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQomZ3Q7Jmd0OyBTZW50OiBUaHVyc2RheSwgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDA2 LCAyMDA3IDg6MjYgQU0gPGJyPg0KJmd0OyZndDsgU3ViamVjdDogUkU6IFtMdHJ1XSBSZTogNzB0 aCBJRVRGIC0gbHRydSBzZXNzaW9uPzxicj4NCiZndDsgLi4uPGJyPg0KJmd0OyZndDsgSSBhZ3Jl ZSB3aXRoIE1hcmsgdGhhdCBvbmUgb3IgbW9yZSB0ZWxlY29uZmVyZW5jZXMgd291bGQgYmUgYmV0 dGVyIGZvcjxicj4NCiZndDsmZ3Q7IG1vcmUgcGFydGljaXBhdGlvbi4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDtUaGUg ZXh0bGFuZ3MgYW5kIG1hY3JvbGFuZ3VhZ2VzDQpkaXNjdXNzaW9uIGlzIDxicj4NCiZndDsmZ3Q7 IGltcG9ydGFudCAoYW5kIGNvbmZ1c2luZykuPGJyPg0KJmd0OyAuLi48YnI+DQomZ3Q7PGJyPg0K Jmd0OyBUaGVyZSBzZWVtcyB0byBiZSBzb21lIGludGVyZXN0IGluIGEgdGVsZWNvbmZlcmVuY2Ug aW5zdGVhZCBvZjxicj4NCiZndDsgV0cgc2Vzc2lvbiBpbiBWYW5jb3V2ZXIuJm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 SWYgd2UgZ28gdGhhdCByb3V0ZSwgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGRvPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBzbyBxdWlja2x5LiZu YnNwOyZuYnNwO0RvZXMgYW55b25lIGhhdmUgdGhlIHJlc291cmNlcyBhbmQgd2lsbGluZ25lc3Mg PGJyPg0KJmd0OyB0byBhY3R1YWxseSBzZXQgdXAgYSB0ZWxlY29uZmVyZW5jZT88YnI+DQomZ3Q7 PGJyPg0KJmd0OyBSYW5keTxicj4NCiZndDs8YnI+DQomZ3Q7PGJyPg0KJmd0Ozxicj4NCiZndDsg X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX188YnI+DQomZ3Q7 IEx0cnUgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0PGJyPg0KJmd0OyA8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86THRydUBpZXRmLm9y ZyI+THRydUBpZXRmLm9yZyA8L2E+PGJyPg0KJmd0OyA8YSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL3d3dzEuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9sdHJ1Ij5odHRwczovL3d3dzEuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1h bi9saXN0aW5mby9sdHJ1PC9hPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPGJyPg0KTHRydSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3Q8 YnI+DQo8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86THRydUBpZXRmLm9yZyI+THRydUBpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT48YnI+ DQo8YSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL3d3dzEuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9sdHJ1Ij5o dHRwczovL3d3dzEuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9sdHJ1PC9hPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+ PC9wPg0KDQo8L2Rpdj4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPjxicj4NCjxiciBjbGVhcj1hbGw+ DQo8YnI+DQotLSA8YnI+DQpNYXJrIDxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KDQo8L2Rpdj4NCg0KPC9kaXY+ DQoNCjwvYm9keT4NCg0KPC9odG1sPg0K --_000_DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561ABEF6F23NAEXMSGC117re_-- --===============0967409620== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============0967409620==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 06 18:55:10 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITQFh-0006vt-Uy; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:55:09 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ITQFh-0006ux-2E for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:55:09 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITQFg-0006uR-OI for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:55:08 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.68]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITQFf-00070Q-ED for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:55:08 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=QpcZsJnbREtbPjt3hY3p0FrZwVThchkfsbXWqJsQZQBACk6mb7wleu6pz2UjcqpT; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [64.105.35.16] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ITQFc-0007L6-Pt for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:55:05 -0400 Message-ID: <02f401c7f0d9$5b671440$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" To: "LTRU Working Group" Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 15:57:52 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888fa44b31bb60a935606719ed0a7b3e29913c42acc7f32488a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 64.105.35.16 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e8a67952aa972b528dd04570d58ad8fe Subject: [Ltru] Fw: 70th IETF - Registration X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi - Though we haven't reached a decision about whether to request a session for the ltru WG at the 70th IETF, here's the meeting information. Randy > From: "IETF Secretariat" > To: "IETF Announcement list" > Cc: ; > Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 3:30 PM > Subject: 70th IETF - Registration > > 70th IETF Meeting > Vancouver, BC, Canada > December 2-7, 2007 > > Registration is now open for the 70th IETF Meeting! > > You can register on line at: > http://www3.ietf.org/meetings/70-IETF.html > > REGISTRATION INFORMATION: > Early-Bird Registration - USD 700.00 > > If you register and pay for your attendance to the IETF-70 before NOON ET > (17:00 UTC/GMT), Friday, 23 November 2007, you will pay the early-bird > price of USD 700.00. > > After Early-Bird cutoff - USD 850.00 > > You can still register and pay online at USD 850.00 until 17:00 > Canada/Pacific Time Friday 30 November 2007 (01:00 UTC/GMT, Saturday 1 > December 2007). > > Full-time Student Registrations - USD 250.00 > > Full-time students with proper ID are eligible to receive a special USD > 250.00 student rate. Student rate is not subject to any late-fees. > Students will also be able to register on-site at the special student > rate. Failure to provide valid student ID on-site will revoke the special > student status. > > CANCELLATION: > > The cut-off for registration cancellation is Monday, 26 November at 17:00 > ET-US (22:00 UTC/GMT). Cancellations are subject to a 10% (ten percent) > cancellation fee if requested by that date and time. > > ON-SITE REGISTRATION: > > You can register onsite at the meeting in Vancouver, BC, Canada starting > Sunday, 2 December at 12:00 noon (local time). > > The IETF meetings start Monday morning and run through Friday lunchtime, > with late scheduling changes. Most training session take place on Sunday > afternoon 2 December. Participants should plan their travel accordingly. > > The IETF Secretariat > > > _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 08 15:52:11 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IU6Le-0000Wc-CF; Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:52:07 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IU6Lc-0000WN-MX for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:52:04 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IU6Lc-0000WF-Bt for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:52:04 -0400 Received: from mta15.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.77]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IU6Lb-0005d7-Uk for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:52:04 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta15.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.04 201-2131-123-105-20051025) with SMTP id <20070908195201.TUWR29779.mta15.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for ; Sat, 8 Sep 2007 15:52:01 -0400 Message-ID: <000701c7f251$b98851a0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" To: "LTRU Working Group" Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 12:52:01 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352 Subject: [Ltru] Is everything ready except extlang? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org It would be really nice to find out whether the extlang/macrolanguage controversy is the only thing separating us from Working Group Last Call. Can everybody please read both drafts and comment on any other issues that need to be resolved before WGLC: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis Official text: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-08.txt Unofficial HTML http://www.inter-locale.com/ID/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-08.html draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis Official text: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.txt Unofficial HTML: http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.html One change that will need to be made to the 4645bis draft it to update the "starting point" Registry to account for two new subtags that have been added since August 17. This will also need to happen before IETF Last Call and during AUTH48 to account for changes made at those times. Also, if newer ISO 639-3 tables are published, those will need to be reflected. It's up to each list member to decide whether to double-check each of the 8,200+ entries in the proposed Registry in 4645bis. I used a program to convert ISO 639-3 entries into Registry records, but some fields like Deprecated and Preferred-Value were determined manually. The body of the draft describes how. I promise this time I won't complain if someone proposes minor wording changes (and I apologize for doing so last time). All reasonable feedback is important at this point. Of course, as responsible group members we have the right to agree or disagree with suggested changes. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 10 01:04:38 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IUbRl-0005g5-47; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:04:29 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IUbRk-0005fz-Cx for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:04:28 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IUbRk-0005fr-3W for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:04:28 -0400 Received: from toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp ([133.27.228.201]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IUbRi-0000LR-DT for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:04:28 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA82F2BCD4 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:04:22 +0900 (JST) Received: from toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dGbf0kOOcQD1 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:04:22 +0900 (JST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dhcp-247-121.mag.keio.ac.jp [133.27.247.121]) by toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB6882BCD2 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:04:22 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <46E4D04E.2090301@w3.org> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:04:14 +0900 From: Felix Sasaki User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 'LTRU Working Group' Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Subject: [Ltru] Implementations of validating BCP 47 processors X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi all, I am looking for validating implementations of BCP 47 processors. I looked at http://www.langtag.net/ and found http://www.bortzmeyer.org/gabuzomeu-parsing-language-tags.html . Are there other validating processors, or do you know of plans (timelines) for their implementation? Many thanks for the information in advance, Felix _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 10 03:00:04 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IUdFZ-0003vh-Cs; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 03:00:01 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IUdFY-0003vS-17 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 03:00:00 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IUdFT-0003v7-Sd for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 02:59:55 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IUdFS-0003OV-1k for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 02:59:55 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 597731C01B8; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 08:59:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5442D1C01B6; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 08:59:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4816A58ECBF; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 08:59:53 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 08:59:53 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Felix Sasaki Message-ID: <20070910065953.GA19860@nic.fr> References: <46E4D04E.2090301@w3.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46E4D04E.2090301@w3.org> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Cc: 'LTRU Working Group' Subject: [Ltru] Re: Implementations of validating BCP 47 processors X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 02:04:14PM +0900, Felix Sasaki wrote a message of 24 lines which said: > Are there other validating processors, or do you know of plans > (timelines) for their implementation? I am not aware of others (which do not mean they don't exist). It is quite possible that many hidden implementations are embedded in a larger program and are not shipped separately. Side note: Apache 2 does not use a validating processor since they ship, in docs/conf/extra/httpd-languages.conf.in, an invalid language, "ltz" (the language is registered but the valid subtag is "lb"). _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 11 09:23:44 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IV5iQ-0007dj-Cn; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:23:42 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IV5iL-0007I2-U7 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:23:37 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IV5iL-0007H5-Im for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:23:37 -0400 Received: from mta13.mail.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.44] helo=mta13.adelphia.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IV5iK-0002ZF-8U for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:23:37 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta13.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070911132335.NCDT5282.mta13.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81>; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:23:35 -0400 Message-ID: <000f01c7f476$f51e2420$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" To: "LTRU Working Group" References: Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 06:23:35 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Implementations of validating BCP 47 processors X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Felix Sasaki wrote: > Are there other validating processors, or do you know of plans > (timelines) for their implementation? I have an unreleased Windows application that generates and validates RFC 4646 tags. I've talked a lot about this program, but never released it for a variety of reasons; my latest excuse is that extended language subtags might be removed from the spec, and I want to know whether to remove support for them from my app before releasing it. I can send you a copy if you are interested. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 11 09:45:43 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IV63i-0002pB-GZ; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:45:42 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IV63h-0002p6-OI for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:45:41 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IV63h-0002ow-EE for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:45:41 -0400 Received: from toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp ([133.27.228.201]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IV63g-0004xN-Vk for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:45:41 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ED3C2BC8F; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:45:31 +0900 (JST) Received: from toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5wmR8Iw3uP7d; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:45:31 +0900 (JST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p8102-ipad408marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp [222.146.168.102]) by toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E69052BC8E; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:45:30 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <46E69BF7.7080908@w3.org> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:45:27 +0900 From: Felix Sasaki User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Ewell References: <000f01c7f476$f51e2420$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> In-Reply-To: <000f01c7f476$f51e2420$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 Cc: LTRU Working Group Subject: [Ltru] Re: Implementations of validating BCP 47 processors X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Doug Ewell wrote: > Felix Sasaki wrote: > >> Are there other validating processors, or do you know of plans >> (timelines) for their implementation? > > I have an unreleased Windows application that generates and validates > RFC 4646 tags. I've talked a lot about this program, but never > released it for a variety of reasons; my latest excuse is that > extended language subtags might be removed from the spec, and I want > to know whether to remove support for them from my app before > releasing it. I can send you a copy if you are interested. It would be very interesting to see that program, but also to have a link to it on the BCP 47 http://www.langtag.net/ page. I'm doing outreach to specification developers asking for adoption of BCP 47 in their draft specs, and implementation information is always good for that purpose. Felix _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 12 01:44:19 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVL1N-0005sK-5k; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:44:17 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVL1L-0005sF-Db for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:44:15 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVL1L-0005s7-1o for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:44:15 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVL1J-0006r8-Dh for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:44:14 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVL15-00008Z-JA for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:43:59 +0200 Received: from pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.86.170.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:43:59 +0200 Received: from nobody by pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:43:59 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:41:55 +0200 Lines: 34 Message-ID: References: <20070619212227.GF12168@mercury.ccil.org><000d01c7b2b8$dc7aa420$6601a8c0@oemcomputer><20070619213750.GG12168@mercury.ccil.org> <20070620003819.GI12168@mercury.ccil.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Extlang stability (was: extlang) X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org John Cowan wrote (2007-06-20): > Peter Constable scripsit: =20 >> Is there a possibility of an encompassed language getting changed not >> to be encompassed? If "xxx" is a macrolanguage and "yyy" an = encompassed >> "microlanguage" (to use Mark's term), I could perhaps see "xxx" >> getting deprecated, but "yyy" getting dissociated from "xxx"? It >> really shouldn't happen: there should have been *some* good reason >> for associated "yyy" with "xxx" in the first place, and that = shouldn't >> go away. =20 > Human error would be the obvious candidate. "Oh, we thought Foovian > was part of the Slobbovian macrolanguage, but that was because Dr. X > put the wrong code on the form back in 2008." Okay, the type "extlang" vs. "language" should be stable. What if new subsets are introduced ? Example: >From xx-aaa xx-aab xx-aac xx-bbb to xx-aaa xx-aaa-aab xx-aaa-aac xx-bbb We can't change the "prefix", but we could change the "macrolanguage", resulting in: %% Orginal %% Updated Extlang: aac Extlang: aac Prefix: xx Prefix: xx=20 Macolanguage: xx Macrolanguage: aaa The "extlang" concept is messier than "Suppress-Script", isn't it ? Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 12 10:00:58 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVSm1-00051I-ID; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:00:57 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVSlz-000518-QM for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:00:55 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVSlz-000510-Ga for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:00:55 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVSly-0007fo-54 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:00:55 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IVSlv-0004sV-Tj; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:00:51 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:00:51 -0400 To: Frank Ellermann Subject: Re: [Ltru] Extlang stability (was: extlang) Message-ID: <20070912140051.GA15603@mercury.ccil.org> References: <20070620003819.GI12168@mercury.ccil.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann scripsit: > The "extlang" concept is messier than "Suppress-Script", isn't it ? It is not, particularly because the work has been done for us by an ISO RA. The trouble with Suppress-Script: is that we, the IETF, invented it ourselves, but don't have the resources to follow through. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Raffiniert ist der Herrgott, aber boshaft ist er nicht. --Albert Einstein _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 12 10:29:12 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVTDM-0002ae-IG; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:29:12 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVTDL-0002aY-00 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:29:11 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVTDK-0002aQ-MJ for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:29:10 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVTDI-0000GA-4x for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:29:10 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 74A9F1C0107 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:29:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 617551C00EF for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:29:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53C9A58F1F0 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:29:07 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:29:07 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: ltru@lists.ietf.org Message-ID: <20070912142907.GB2704@nic.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6" Content-Disposition: inline X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 19fc2b47780353ba1ee25032fbc339e7 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] [Mark.Wahl@informed-control.com: updated draft for OpenID language tags for attribute values] X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Any opinions (besides the fact that the reference to BCP 47 is outdated) on this binary encoding for language tags? --y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from maya.nic.fr [192.134.4.160] by batilda.nic.fr with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.6) for (single-drop); Thu, 06 Sep 2007 22:20:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay1.nic.fr (relay1.nic.fr [192.134.4.162]) by maya40.nic.fr (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id l86KKV8l658936 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 22:20:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: by relay1.nic.fr (Postfix) id 420E6A1DA91; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 22:20:31 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: bortzmeyer@nic.fr Received: from mx1.nic.fr (mx1.nic.fr [192.134.4.10]) by relay1.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F7A0A1DA85 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 22:20:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mx1.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx1.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 33FC91714050 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 22:20:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mx1.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id E9E57171408B; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 22:20:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org (whitealder.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by mx1.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F3C1714050 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 22:20:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46FD108305; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:20:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rocky.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kMFiBWJQyOYY; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:20:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from openid.net (openid2.openid.net [140.211.166.41]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84E871081AE; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:20:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by openid.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62048E804F; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 13:20:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: specs@openid.net Delivered-To: mailman-post+specs@openid.net Received: from mail.cs.utexas.edu (mail.cs.utexas.edu [128.83.139.10]) by openid.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95D76E8049 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 13:20:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.249] (rrcs-24-227-168-86.sw.biz.rr.com [24.227.168.86]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.cs.utexas.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l86KKCtU009765 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 15:20:13 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <46E060F5.3010907@informed-control.com> Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:20:05 -0500 Old-From: Mark Wahl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2) Gecko/20070222 SeaMonkey/1.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: OpenID specs list Old-Subject: updated draft for OpenID language tags for attribute values Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------090106080906090608060900" X-BeenThere: specs@openid.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: OpenID Specifications Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: specs-bounces@openid.net Errors-To: specs-bounces@openid.net X-PMX-Version: 5.3.2.304607, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.1.298604, Antispam-Data: 2007.9.6.125123 X-PerlMx-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIII, Probability=7%, Report='HTML_70_90 0.1, __BAT_BOUNDARY 0, __CP_URI_IN_BODY 0, __CT 0, __CTYPE_HAS_BOUNDARY 0, __CTYPE_MULTIPART 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __HTML_BOLD 0, __MIME_HTML 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __TAG_EXISTS_HTML 0, __USER_AGENT 0' X-UIDL: 2167bc1940c4b079e1c2c95078dbbb6a X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000746, version=1.1.3 Subject: updated draft for OpenID language tags for attribute values From: Mark Wahl Received-SPF: on batilda: SPF-pass localhost is always allowed. spfquery: localhost is always allowed. Received-SPF: pass (spfquery: localhost is always allowed.) client-ip=127.0.0.1; envelope-from=; helo=mx1.nic.fr; This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090106080906090608060900 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've updated my draft specification for language tags in OpenID attribute values with some minor bug fixes. It should hopefully appear shortly. I've attached a copy of the HTML to this email. Mark Wahl Informed Control Inc. --------------090106080906090608060900 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8; name="openid-value-lang.html" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="openid-value-lang.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Draft: Language Tags for OpenID Values</ti= tle> <meta http-equiv=3D"Expires" content=3D"Thu, 06 Sep 2007 16:04:48 +0000"> <meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8"> <meta name=3D"description" content=3D"Language Tags for OpenID Values"> <meta name=3D"keywords" content=3D"identity, OpenID, schema"> <meta name=3D"generator" content=3D"xml2rfc v1.32 (http://xml.resource.or= g/)"> <style type=3D'text/css'><!-- body { font-family: verdana, charcoal, helvetica, arial, sans-se= rif; font-size: small; color: #000; background-color: #FFF; margin: 2em; } h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 { font-family: helvetica, monaco, "MS Sans Serif", arial, s= ans-serif; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; } h1 { color: #900; background-color: transparent; text-align: righ= t; } h3 { color: #333; background-color: transparent; } td.RFCbug { font-size: x-small; text-decoration: none; width: 30px; height: 30px; padding-top: 2px; text-align: justify; vertical-align: middle; background-color: #000; } td.RFCbug span.RFC { font-family: monaco, charcoal, geneva, "MS Sans Serif", h= elvetica, verdana, sans-serif; font-weight: bold; color: #666; } td.RFCbug span.hotText { font-family: charcoal, monaco, geneva, "MS Sans Serif", h= elvetica, verdana, sans-serif; font-weight: normal; text-align: center; color: #FFF; } table.TOCbug { width: 30px; height: 15px; } td.TOCbug { text-align: center; width: 30px; height: 15px; color: #FFF; background-color: #900; } td.TOCbug a { font-family: monaco, charcoal, geneva, "MS Sans Serif", h= elvetica, sans-serif; font-weight: bold; font-size: x-small; text-decoration: n= one; color: #FFF; background-color: transparent; } td.header { font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-s= mall; vertical-align: top; width: 33%; color: #FFF; background-color: #666; } td.author { font-weight: bold; font-size: x-small; margin-left: 4= em; } td.author-text { font-size: x-small; } /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/too= ltip2.html */ a.info { /* This is the key. */ position: relative; z-index: 24; text-decoration: none; } a.info:hover { z-index: 25; color: #FFF; background-color: #900; } a.info span { display: none; } a.info:hover span.info { /* The span will display just on :hover state. */ display: block; position: absolute; font-size: smaller; top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em; padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333; color: #900; background-color: #EEE; text-align: left; } a { font-weight: bold; } a:link { color: #900; background-color: transparent; } a:visited { color: #633; background-color: transparent; } a:active { color: #633; background-color: transparent; } p { margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; } p.copyright { font-size: x-small; } p.toc { font-size: small; font-weight: bold; margin-left: 3em; } table.toc { margin: 0 0 0 3em; padding: 0; border: 0; vertical-al= ign: text-top; } td.toc { font-size: small; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: tex= t-top; } ol.text { margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; } ul.text { margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; } li { margin-left: 3em; } /* RFC-2629 <spanx>s and <artwork>s. */ em { font-style: italic; } strong { font-weight: bold; } dfn { font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; } cite { font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; } tt { color: #036; } tt, pre, pre dfn, pre em, pre cite, pre span { font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace; font-size= : small; } pre { text-align: left; padding: 4px; color: #000; background-color: #CCC; } pre dfn { color: #900; } pre em { color: #66F; background-color: #FFC; font-weight: norm= al; } pre .key { color: #33C; font-weight: bold; } pre .id { color: #900; } pre .str { color: #000; background-color: #CFF; } pre .val { color: #066; } pre .rep { color: #909; } pre .oth { color: #000; background-color: #FCF; } pre .err { background-color: #FCC; } /* RFC-2629 <texttable>s. */ table.all, table.full, table.headers, table.none { font-size: small; text-align: center; border-width: 2px; vertical-align: top; border-collapse: collapse; } table.all, table.full { border-style: solid; border-color: black;= } table.headers, table.none { border-style: none; } th { font-weight: bold; border-color: black; border-width: 2px 2px 3px 2px; } table.all th, table.full th { border-style: solid; } table.headers th { border-style: none none solid none; } table.none th { border-style: none; } table.all td { border-style: solid; border-color: #333; border-width: 1px 2px; } table.full td, table.headers td, table.none td { border-style: no= ne; } hr { height: 1px; } hr.insert { width: 80%; border-style: none; border-width: 0; color: #CCC; background-color: #CCC; } --></style> </head> <body> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <table summary=3D"layout" width=3D"66%" border=3D"0" cellpadding=3D"0" ce= llspacing=3D"0"><tr><td><table summary=3D"layout" width=3D"100%" border=3D= "0" cellpadding=3D"2" cellspacing=3D"1"> <tr><td class=3D"header">Draft</td><td class=3D"header">M. Wahl</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"header"> </td><td class=3D"header">Informed Control= Inc.</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"header"> </td><td class=3D"header">September 6, 200= 7</td></tr> </table></td></tr></table> <h1><br />Language Tags for OpenID Values</h1> <h3>Abstract</h3> <p> This document defines a mechanism for transferring language tags=20 associated with UTF-8 string values in OpenID protocols, in=20 particular representing languages of attribute values in the=20 OpenID Attribute Exchange protocol. </p><a name=3D"toc"></a><br /><hr /> <h3>Table of Contents</h3> <p class=3D"toc"> <a href=3D"#anchor1">1.</a>  Introduction<br /> <a href=3D"#anchor2">2.</a>  Language Tag<br /> <a href=3D"#anchor3">3.</a>  OpenID AX Attribute Value Transfer Encoding<br />     <a href=3D"#anchor4">3.1.</a>  Example<br /> <a href=3D"#anchor5">4.</a>  Use with other OpenID specifications<br /> <a href=3D"#anchor6">5.</a>  Sample Implementation<br /> <a href=3D"#anchor7">6.</a>  Security Considerations<br /> <a href=3D"#rfc.references1">7.</a>  References<br />     <a href=3D"#rfc.references1">7.1.</a>  Normative References<br />     <a href=3D"#rfc.references2">7.2.</a>  Informative References<br /> <a href=3D"#anchor10">Appendix A.</a>  Copyright<br /> <a href=3D"#rfc.authors">§</a>  Author's Address<br /> </p> <br clear=3D"all" /> <a name=3D"anchor1"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <a name=3D"rfc.section.1"></a><h3>1.  Introduction</h3> <p> It is often desirable to be able to indicate the (human) language=20 associated with protocol elements exchanged in an identity system.=20 Language tags are especially useful when they can be associated with specific values that are part of a set in order to provide the=20 receiver with a choice of values depending on the language of the user; in particular, language tags can be associated with values=20 of an attribute. For example, LDAP implementations use the mechanism described in=20 <a class=3D'info' href=3D'#RFC3866'>RFC 3866<span> (</span><span class=3D= 'info'>Zeilenga, K., “Language Tags and Ranges in the Lightweight D= irectory Access Protocol (LDAP),” .</span><span>)</span></a> [RFC38= 66] to transfer language tags with=20 values in the LDAP protocol. For another example, protocols based on XML= can encode language tags using the xml:lang encoding, e.g. </p> <div style=3D'display: table; width: 0; margin-left: 3em; margin-right: a= uto'><pre> <attribute name=3D"SecretQuestion"> <value xml:lang=3D"en-GB">What colour is your hair?</value> <value xml:lang=3D"en-US">What color is your hair?</value> </attribute> </pre></div><p> </p> <p>As OpenID is neither an XML-based protocol nor uses LDAP attribute des= criptions, a new mechanism is needed to associate language tags with values in=20 OpenID protocols. </p> <p>=20 This document defines a mechanism by which a party in an identity system using the OpenID protocols can associate a language tag with a string. The input to the mechanism is a language tag and a string value. The output from the mechanism is a <a class=3D'info' href=3D'#RFC3629'>UT= F-8<span> (</span><span class=3D'info'>Yergeau, F., “UTF-8, a trans= formation format of ISO 10646,” November 2003.</span><span>)</= span></a> [RFC3629] encoding of a combination of the language tag and the value.=20 </p> <p>The initial use for this mechanism is in associating language tags=20 with string-valued attribute values in the=20 <a class=3D'info' href=3D'#OpenID.attribute-1.0'>OpenID Attribute Exchang= e protocol<span> (</span><span class=3D'info'>Hardt, D., Bufu, J., and J.= Hoyt, “OpenID Attribute Exchange 1.0 - Draft 07,” August&nbs= p;2007.</span><span>)</span></a> [OpenID.attribute‑1.0]. </p> <p> This document does not specify mechanisms for </p> <ul class=3D"text"> <li>expressing or determining the set of languages or locales recognized = by the user, </li> <li>allowing an RP to request only values in a particular language tag be= returned from a fetch request, or </li> <li>associating language tags with binary or XML-valued attributes </li> </ul><p> </p> <p> The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in=20 <a class=3D'info' href=3D'#RFC2119'>RFC 2119<span> (</s= pan><span class=3D'info'>Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to= Indicate Requirement Levels,” March 1997.</span><span>)</span= ></a> [RFC2119]. </p> <a name=3D"anchor2"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <a name=3D"rfc.section.2"></a><h3>2.  Language Tag</h3> <p>A language tag is a string of characters which represent the name of a= language.=20 </p> <p>Language tags are described in <a class=3D'info' href=3D'#RFC3066'>RFC= 3066 (BCP 47)<span> (</span><span class=3D'info'>Alvestrand, H., “= Tags for the Identification of Languages,” .</span><span>)</span></= a> [RFC3066]. Language tags are written using the characters LATIN SMALL= LETTER a-z, DIGIT 0-9, and HYPHEN, e.g. fr, en-us or i-klingon, and are = two or more characters long. </p> <p>The encoding of a language tag uses Plane 14 characters as defined in = <a class=3D'info' href=3D'#RFC2482'>RFC 2482<span> (</span><span class=3D= 'info'>Whistler, K. and G. Adams, “Language Tagging in Unicode Plai= n Text,” .</span><span>)</span></a> [RFC2482]. The characters descr= ibed in RFC 2482 were subsequently integrated into Unicode and ISO 10646.= The language tag is encoded as a string of two or more Plane 14 charact= ers taken from the set {U+E002D,U+E0030,U+E0031,...,U+E0039,U+E0061,U+E00= 62,...,U+E007A}. There is one Plane 14 character for each DIGIT characte= r and one for each LATIN SMALL LETTER character. The number of a Plane 1= 4 character is 0xE0000 plus the number of the HYPHEN character, the DIGIT= character or the LATIN SMALL LETTER character.=20 </p> <p>The Unicode plane 14 characters used in this encoding are: </p><div style=3D'display: table; width: 0; margin-left: 3em; margin-righ= t: auto'><pre> U+E0001 LANGUAGE TAG U+E002D TAG HYPHEN-MINUS U+E0030 TAG DIGIT ZERO ... U+E0039 TAG DIGIT NINE U+E0061 TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER A ... U+E007A TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER Z U+E007F CANCEL TAG </pre></div> <p>For example, a language tag of "EN" would be converted to lower case l= atin characters ("en") and then 0xE0000 added to each character, to form = the two characters=20 </p> <div style=3D'display: table; width: 0; margin-left: 3em; margin-right: a= uto'><pre> U+E0065 # TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER E U+E006E # TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER N </pre></div><p> <p> The bytes of the UTF-8 encoding of this two character long language tag a= re </p><div style=3D'display: table; width: 0; margin-left: 3em; margin-righ= t: auto'><pre> F3 A0 81 A5 # TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER E F3 A0 81 AE # TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER N </pre></div> <a name=3D"anchor3"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <a name=3D"rfc.section.3"></a><h3>3.  OpenID AX Attribute Value Transfer Encoding</h3> <p>It is assumed that the many values of attributes transferred using Ope= nID AX will not have language tags, but that a few attributes will have value= s with language tags. It is assumed that the syntax of these values are st= rings in the Unicode/ISO 10646 character set.=20 </p> <p> A value without a language tag is transferred as described in=20 <a class=3D'info' href=3D'#OpenID.attribute-1.0'>[OpenID.attribute‑= 1.0]<span> (</span><span class=3D'info'>Hardt, D., Bufu, J., and J. Hoyt,= “OpenID Attribute Exchange 1.0 - Draft 07,” August 2007= .</span><span>)</span></a>. </p> <p> A combination of an attribute value with a language tag is transferred in= OpenID AX with the value parameter consisting of the concatenation of th= e following bytes: </p> <ul class=3D"text"> <li>the bytes of the UTF-8 encoding of the Unicode character LANGUAGE TAG= (0xF3 0xA0 0x80 0x81) </li> <li>the bytes of the UTF-8 encoding of two or more plane 14 characters en= coding the language </li> <li>the bytes of the UTF-8 encoding of the underlying attribute value </li> <li>the bytes of the UTF-8 encoding of the Unicode character CANCEL TAG (= 0xF3 0xA0 0x81 0xBF) </li> </ul><p> </p> <p>A CANCEL TAG character is explicitly included after the value in order= to avoid problems with implementations that are not language tag aware f= rom inadvertantly concatenating language-tagged values with other strings= that are not in that language. </p> <p>Implementations of the OpenID Attribute Exchange protocol which=20 accept Store requests MUST allow the values being stored to have associat= ed language tags, when permitted by the attribute definition.=20 </p> <a name=3D"anchor4"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <a name=3D"rfc.section.3.1"></a><h3>3.1.  Example</h3> <p> Suppose a user had an attribute representing their "film pr=C3=A9f=C3=A9r= =C3=A9" (favorite movie), which has four values: </p> <blockquote class=3D"text"><dl> <dt>(no language)</dt> <dd> 2001 </dd> <dt>(French)</dt> <dd> Am=C3=A9lie </dd> <dt>(English)</dt> <dd> Delicatessen=20 </dd> <dt>(no language)</dt> <dd> M </dd> </dl></blockquote><p> </p> <p> <p>A fetch would return the following bytes for this attribute: </p><div style=3D'display: table; width: 0; margin-left: 3em; margin-righ= t: auto'><pre> openid.ax.type.fav_movie=3Dhttp://example.fr/schema#FilmPr??f??r?? openid.ax.count.fav_movie=3D4 openid.ax.value.fav_movie.1=3D2001 openid.ax.value.fav_movie.2=3D????????????Am??lie???? openid.ax.value.fav_movie.3=3D????????????Delicatessen???? openid.ax.value.fav_movie.4=3DM </pre></div> <p> (In the preceeding figure, a question mark indicates a byte for which the= re is not a printing ASCII character.) </p> <p> <p>The value of openid.ax.value.fav_movie.2 ("Am=C3=A9lie" in French), th= e UTF-8 encoding of ten Unicode characters, is the following 23 bytes: </p><div style=3D'display: table; width: 0; margin-left: 3em; margin-righ= t: auto'><pre> f3 a0 80 81 # LANGUAGE TAG f3 a0 81 a6 # TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER F f3 a0 81 b2 # TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER R 41 # A 6d # m c3 a1 # eacute 6c # l 69 # i 65 # e f3 a0 81 bf # CANCEL TAG </pre></div> <p> <p>The value of openid.ax.value.fav_movie.3 ("Delicatessen" in English) i= s the following bytes: </p><div style=3D'display: table; width: 0; margin-left: 3em; margin-righ= t: auto'><pre> f3 a0 80 81 # LANGUAGE TAG f3 a0 81 a5 # TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER E f3 a0 81 ae # TAG LATIN SMALL LETTER N 44 65 6c 69 63 61 74 65 73 73 65 6e f3 a0 81 bf # CANCEL TAG </pre></div> <a name=3D"anchor5"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <a name=3D"rfc.section.4"></a><h3>4.  Use with other OpenID specifications</h3> <p> This encoding mechanism is currently not defined to operate with values t= ransferred in the OpenID Simple Registration Extension. </p> <a name=3D"anchor6"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <a name=3D"rfc.section.5"></a><h3>5.  Sample Implementation</h3> <p> The following Java function attaches a language tag to a value. It is imp= lemented using UTF-16 surrogate characters. </p><div style=3D'display: table; width: 0; margin-left: 3em; margin-righ= t: auto'><pre> public class LanguageTag { public static final char SUPP_CHAR_0 =3D 0xDB40; public static final char SUPP_CHAR_1 =3D 0xDC00; public static final char TAG_MAX =3D 0x7F; public static final char TAG_LANG =3D 0x01; public static final char TAG_CANCEL =3D 0x7F; /** * @param tagInAscii the ASCII letters of the language tag, e.g. "fr" * @param rest the value being tagged */ public static byte[] getBytes(String tagInAscii,String rest) throws UnsupportedEncodingException { String s =3D add(tagInAscii,rest); return s.getBytes("UTF-8"); } /** * returns a new String consisting of the language tag wrapping the s= tring rest. * @param tagInAscii the ASCII letters of the language tag, e.g. "fr" * @param rest the value being tagged */ public static String add(String tagInAscii,String rest) { if (tagInAscii =3D=3D null || tagInAscii.length() =3D=3D 0) retur= n rest; String tl =3DtagInAscii.toLowerCase(); StringBuffer sb =3D new StringBuffer(); addLeadingTag(sb,tagInAscii); sb.append(rest); addTrailingTag(sb); return sb.toString(); } private static void addLeadingTag(StringBuffer sb,String tagInAscii) = { char c0 =3D SUPP_CHAR_0; char c1 =3D SUPP_CHAR_1 + TAG_LANG; sb.append(c0); sb.append(c1); int tl =3D tagInAscii.length(); for (int i =3D 0; i < tl;i++) { char cx =3D tagInAscii.charAt(i); if (cx <=3D 0x20 || cx >=3D 0x7F) continue; c1 =3D (char)(SUPP_CHAR_1 + cx); sb.append(c0); sb.append(c1); } } private static void addTrailingTag(StringBuffer sb) { char c0 =3D SUPP_CHAR_0; char c1 =3D SUPP_CHAR_1 + TAG_CANCEL; sb.append(c0); sb.append(c1); } } </pre></div> <a name=3D"anchor7"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <a name=3D"rfc.section.6"></a><h3>6.  Security Considerations</h3> <p>The language tag representation mechanism used in this document is not= known to raise any additional security concerns beyond that discussed in= RFC 3066. </p> <a name=3D"rfc.references"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <a name=3D"rfc.section.7"></a><h3>7.  References</h3> <a name=3D"rfc.references1"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <h3>7.1. Normative References</h3> <table width=3D"99%" border=3D"0"> <tr><td class=3D"author-text" valign=3D"top"><a name=3D"OpenID.attribute-= 1.0">[OpenID.attribute-1.0]</a></td> <td class=3D"author-text">Hardt, D., Bufu, J., and J. Hoyt, “<a hre= f=3D"http://openid.net/specs/openid-attribute-exchange-1_0-07.html">OpenI= D Attribute Exchange 1.0 - Draft 07</a>,” August 2007.</td></t= r> <tr><td class=3D"author-text" valign=3D"top"><a name=3D"RFC2119">[RFC2119= ]</a></td> <td class=3D"author-text"><a href=3D"mailto:sob@harvard.edu">Bradner, S.<= /a>, “<a href=3D"ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2119.txt">Key words = for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</a>,” BCP 14, R= FC 2119, March 1997 (<a href=3D"ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2= 119.txt">TXT</a>, <a href=3D"http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/html/rfc2= 119.html">HTML</a>, <a href=3D"http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/xml/rfc= 2119.xml">XML</a>).</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"author-text" valign=3D"top"><a name=3D"RFC2482">[RFC2482= ]</a></td> <td class=3D"author-text">Whistler, K. and G. Adams, “<a href=3D"ft= p://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2482.txt">Language Tagging in Unicode Plain T= ext</a>,” RFC 2482.</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"author-text" valign=3D"top"><a name=3D"RFC3066">[RFC3066= ]</a></td> <td class=3D"author-text">Alvestrand, H., “<a href=3D"ftp://ftp.isi= .edu/in-notes/rfc3066.txt">Tags for the Identification of Languages</a>,&= rdquo; RFC 3066, BCP 47.</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"author-text" valign=3D"top"><a name=3D"RFC3629">[RFC3629= ]</a></td> <td class=3D"author-text">Yergeau, F., “<a href=3D"ftp://ftp.isi.ed= u/in-notes/rfc3629.txt">UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646</a>,&= rdquo; STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003.</td></tr> </table> <a name=3D"rfc.references2"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <h3>7.2. Informative References</h3> <table width=3D"99%" border=3D"0"> <tr><td class=3D"author-text" valign=3D"top"><a name=3D"RFC3866">[RFC3866= ]</a></td> <td class=3D"author-text">Zeilenga, K., “<a href=3D"ftp://ftp.isi.e= du/in-notes/rfc3866.txt">Language Tags and Ranges in the Lightweight Dire= ctory Access Protocol (LDAP)</a>,” RFC 3866.</td></tr> </table> <a name=3D"anchor10"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <a name=3D"rfc.section.A"></a><h3>Appendix A.  Copyright</h3> <p> Copyright (C) Informed Control Inc. (2007). =20 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO= =20 ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE=20 ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR=20 A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. </p> <a name=3D"rfc.authors"></a><br /><hr /> <table summary=3D"layout" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"2" class=3D"TO= Cbug" align=3D"right"><tr><td class=3D"TOCbug"><a href=3D"#toc"> TOC=  </a></td></tr></table> <h3>Author's Address</h3> <table width=3D"99%" border=3D"0" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"0"> <tr><td class=3D"author-text"> </td> <td class=3D"author-text">Mark Wahl</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"author-text"> </td> <td class=3D"author-text">Informed Control Inc.</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"author-text"> </td> <td class=3D"author-text">PO Box 90626</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"author-text"> </td> <td class=3D"author-text">Austin, TX 78709</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"author-text"> </td> <td class=3D"author-text">US</td></tr> <tr><td class=3D"author" align=3D"right">Email: </td> <td class=3D"author-text"><a href=3D"mailto:mark.wahl@informed-control.co= m">mark.wahl@informed-control.com</a></td></tr> </table> </body></html> --------------090106080906090608060900 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs --------------090106080906090608060900-- --y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 12 15:21:07 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVXlo-0006Ye-5A; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:21:04 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVXlm-0006UU-2d for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:21:02 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVXll-0006Rm-MI for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:21:01 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.61]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVXlk-00085w-BK for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:21:01 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=Q2qmJ51F/Vl9ph77UqGOJB2Ti2RHbaxcDrpt5c03IknlKoAC7wtCHOrJG1wS3IEX; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [68.164.242.176] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1IVXlj-00044i-Rp for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:21:00 -0400 Message-ID: <00d401c7f572$76843080$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <20070912142907.GB2704@nic.fr> Subject: Re: [Ltru] [Mark.Wahl@informed-control.com: updated draft for OpenIDlanguage tags for attribute values] Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 12:23:55 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888fa44b31bb60a935661a2d6138b666a397bc4a66c39bd4379350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 68.164.242.176 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi - > From: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> > To: <ltru@lists.ietf.org> > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 7:29 AM > Subject: [Ltru] [Mark.Wahl@informed-control.com: updated draft for OpenIDlanguage tags for attribute values] > > Any opinions (besides the fact that the reference to BCP 47 is > outdated) on this binary encoding for language tags? ... As a technical contributor... Chapter 16.9 of The Unicode Unicode Standard 5.0 says: "The use of these characters is strongly discouraged." Though one might argue that this protocol is a candidate for using them, I don't see any particular value to using them instead of a more structured protocol incorporating the ability to include "real" language tags. Randy _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 12 16:00:19 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVYNn-0001gE-6n; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:00:19 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVYNl-0001XI-ID for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:00:17 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVYNl-0001UW-5e for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:00:17 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.172]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVYNj-0000au-Op for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:00:17 -0400 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id z38so291545ugc for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 13:00:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=boG8VidrItT6+w0zIiU7QOQKCvP0RGX2+FeSWNku3QA=; b=bC41587dYb7bFDJKGCYIT4jh2N3u1+WDsoGznQ3MCJq21vByi9DSWd5XxLWhAIlP4zlUsX5L8Hcgr1l9AEjPASbEv2OTtxCDBdSGnppPDqncF+eWrrEnlUJ1C1exyPFE2jiOVao7TCYbBe47fIwoYqqSNBIlMI9xF2WR2rfeuvQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=DgQJD5XS0jEHdf2glpIi74fhMfitTyH4sxEs8CaGAxgt+JYPI6gYA4q9vowBhVo4WZ1tukd0Bh35WBmsedTawkPAsEvg4c4M9lfXz3fAnEjP3niT44icMqwtpf/K/eC6hDSV/d9RUYNcJQWX/Uxb7sDCvgWrp+PBUZQLjwkvLt4= Received: by 10.142.156.2 with SMTP id d2mr486440wfe.1189627213376; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 13:00:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.253.10 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 13:00:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709121300p5667d131md58e7aaba1dd4ae1@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 13:00:13 -0700 From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> To: "John Cowan" <cowan@ccil.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Extlang stability (was: extlang) In-Reply-To: <20070912140051.GA15603@mercury.ccil.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20070620003819.GI12168@mercury.ccil.org> <fc7uab$cc2$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070912140051.GA15603@mercury.ccil.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: b38ebf8fb0867f36 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52f7a77164458f8c7b36b66787c853da Cc: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0261046966==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============0261046966== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_39281_25783045.1189627213371" ------=_Part_39281_25783045.1189627213371 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I disagree. The base information of whether an instance of written language is in a given script is pretty clear, and the number of scripts are quite bounded. While it may take some effort to determine whether a script is in overwhelming usage for a language, it is a relatively straightforward task. On the other hand, the boundaries between languages (languages vs dialects and so on) are always the subject of dispute. According to a conversation with Ken Whistler, there is a considerable controversy among the linguistics community over the language model used in SIL which then went into 639-3. Now, this is not at all to say that they did a bad job -- they did a great job, especially with the huge number of languages that they had to deal with -- however, it is inherently a much more difficult task. And the whole notion of macrolanguage is not something that exists "in the wild"; it is a construct designed to enable certain usage patterns -- and it is up to us to determine whether it fits best in 4646bis as the Macrolanguage: field or hard-wired into extlang. Mark On 9/12/07, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote: > > Frank Ellermann scripsit: > > > The "extlang" concept is messier than "Suppress-Script", isn't it ? > > It is not, particularly because the work has been done for us by > an ISO RA. The trouble with Suppress-Script: is that we, the IETF, > invented it ourselves, but don't have the resources to follow through. > > -- > John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> http://www.ccil.org/~cowan > Raffiniert ist der Herrgott, aber boshaft ist er nicht. > --Albert Einstein > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > -- Mark ------=_Part_39281_25783045.1189627213371 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I disagree. The base information of whether an instance of written language is in a given script is pretty clear, and the number of scripts are quite bounded. While it may take some effort to determine whether a script is in overwhelming usage for a language, it is a relatively straightforward task. <br><br>On the other hand, the boundaries between languages (languages vs dialects and so on) are always the subject of dispute. According to a conversation with Ken Whistler, there is a considerable controversy among the linguistics community over the language model used in SIL which then went into 639-3. Now, this is not at all to say that they did a bad job -- they did a great job, especially with the huge number of languages that they had to deal with -- however, it is inherently a much more difficult task. And the whole notion of macrolanguage is not something that exists "in the wild"; it is a construct designed to enable certain usage patterns -- and it is up to us to determine whether it fits best in 4646bis as the Macrolanguage: field or hard-wired into extlang. <br><br>Mark<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/12/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">John Cowan</b> <<a href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org">cowan@ccil.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Frank Ellermann scripsit:<br><br>> The "extlang" concept is messier than "Suppress-Script", isn't it ?<br><br>It is not, particularly because the work has been done for us by<br>an ISO RA.  The trouble with Suppress-Script: is that we, the IETF, <br>invented it ourselves, but don't have the resources to follow through.<br><br>--<br>John Cowan  <<a href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org">cowan@ccil.org</a>>  <a href="http://www.ccil.org/~cowan">http://www.ccil.org/~cowan </a><br>        Raffiniert ist der Herrgott, aber boshaft ist er nicht.<br>                --Albert Einstein<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Ltru mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ltru@ietf.org"> Ltru@ietf.org</a><br><a href="https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru">https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Mark ------=_Part_39281_25783045.1189627213371-- --===============0261046966== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============0261046966==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 13 02:42:47 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IViPT-0002Op-PT; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 02:42:43 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IViPS-0002Oj-BZ for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 02:42:42 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IViPR-0002Ob-Vs for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 02:42:41 -0400 Received: from scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.251.195]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IViPQ-0004gv-10 for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 02:42:41 -0400 Received: from scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scmse1 [133.2.253.16]) by scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id l8D6gbK6012406 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 15:42:37 +0900 (JST) Received: from (133.2.206.133) by scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp via smtp id 266e_8421119a_61c4_11dc_809e_0014221fa3c9; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 15:42:37 +0900 X-AuthUser: duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Received: from Tanzawa.it.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.210.1]:49827) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id <S1405E1> for <ltru@ietf.org> from <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 15:39:33 +0900 Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20070913141037.071c18b0@localhost> X-Sender: duerst@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6J Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:12:46 +0900 To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>, "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [Ltru] [Mark.Wahl@informed-control.com: updated draft forOpenIDlanguage tags for attribute values] In-Reply-To: <00d401c7f572$76843080$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> References: <20070912142907.GB2704@nic.fr> <00d401c7f572$76843080$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org At 04:23 07/09/13, Randy Presuhn wrote: >Hi - > >> From: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> >> To: <ltru@lists.ietf.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 7:29 AM >> Subject: [Ltru] [Mark.Wahl@informed-control.com: updated draft for >OpenIDlanguage tags for attribute values] >> >> Any opinions (besides the fact that the reference to BCP 47 is >> outdated) on this binary encoding for language tags? >... > >As a technical contributor... > >Chapter 16.9 of The Unicode Unicode Standard 5.0 says: >"The use of these characters is strongly discouraged." >Though one might argue that this protocol is a candidate >for using them, I don't see any particular value to using them >instead of a more structured protocol incorporating the ability >to include "real" language tags. I fully and completely agree. These "tag" characters have been encoded to get some people away from even worse ideas, but using them is still a really bad idea. Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 13 05:12:19 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVkkA-0001HT-1x; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 05:12:14 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVkk9-0001HO-1z for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 05:12:13 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVkk8-0001HG-Kq for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 05:12:12 -0400 Received: from virtual3.netaktiv.com ([80.67.170.53] helo=mail.bortzmeyer.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVkk7-0007hs-6f for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 05:12:12 -0400 Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id EE1AD240823; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 10:12:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C21A112399; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:09:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:09:01 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> To: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20070913090901.GA2209@sources.org> References: <20070912142907.GB2704@nic.fr> <00d401c7f572$76843080$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00d401c7f572$76843080$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org> Subject: [Ltru] Re: [Mark.Wahl@informed-control.com: updated draft for OpenIDlanguage tags for attribute values] X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 12:23:55PM -0700, Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> wrote a message of 28 lines which said: > I don't see any particular value to using them instead of a more > structured protocol I believe it is an issue of ascending compatibility with older implementations. Thanks for the comments, I'll forward them to the OpenID people. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 13 06:36:53 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVm43-00042l-VW; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 06:36:51 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVm42-000419-Jy for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 06:36:50 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVm42-00040g-7C for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 06:36:50 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVm40-0000eY-KI for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 06:36:50 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVm3o-0002fr-Jm for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:36:36 +0200 Received: from pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.86.170.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:36:36 +0200 Received: from nobody by pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:36:36 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:28:54 +0200 Lines: 33 Message-ID: <fcb3qs$b22$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <002c01c7ca8b$076f2d60$6a01a8c0@DGBP7M81><46A049B5.2050800@yahoo-inc.com><20070720060014.GQ5737@mercury.ccil.org><46A052B8.3060508@yahoo-inc.com><011701c7cae9$f23811a0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fbjiua$36r$1@sea.gmane.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann wrote: > the NCRs in the registry are "real" NCRs, using the hex. format > recommended by the W3C "charmod". I've now updated 4645bis.awk to convert NCRs to UTF-8, see http://xyzzy.webhop.info/home/ltru/4645bis.awk The script can extract an UTF-8 language subtag registry from Doug's drafts, and it can also convert 4646 registries to UTF-8. As John said: _doom_ When I try to open a plain text UTF-8 file with Firefox 2 under Win XP I've to set the encoding manually (unless I add a BOM). When I convert an UTF-8 registry to XML and use the "file upload" interface of the W3C validator I run into several fatal errors at the W3C validator. Unless I use the "hard" character encoding override option at the validator. Arguably it's the fault of Firefox 2 under Win XP to use Content-Tye: text/xml without charset in its file upload header for 4645bisU.xml. But in practice it's as it is, both FF2 and the W3C validator ignore encoding=3D"UTF-8" in the 1st line <?xml version=3D"1.0" encoding=3D"UTF-8" standalone=3D"yes" ?> If you want to check your tools with an UTF-8 registry take http://xyzzy.webhop.info/home/ltru/4645bisU.xml I'm not yet sure that I got the NCR to UTF-8 conversions right. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 13 07:27:56 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVmrT-0001gc-PD; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:27:55 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVmrS-0001gO-Ng for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:27:54 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVmrS-0001gG-Cz for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:27:54 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVmrR-0001Qc-5H for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:27:54 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVmrJ-0000As-64 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:27:45 +0200 Received: from pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.86.170.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:27:45 +0200 Received: from nobody by pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:27:45 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:25:31 +0200 Lines: 27 Message-ID: <fcb6rc$kj3$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <20070620003819.GI12168@mercury.ccil.org><fc7uab$cc2$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070912140051.GA15603@mercury.ccil.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Extlang stability X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org John Cowan wrote: > Frank Ellermann scripsit: =20 >> The "extlang" concept is messier than "Suppress-Script", isn't it ? =20 > It is not, particularly because the work has been done for us by > an ISO RA. The trouble with Suppress-Script: is that we, the IETF, > invented it ourselves, but don't have the resources to follow through. IBTD, we invented the rigid and awkward extlang syntax, not ISO. And we want "stable forever" tags. With the "Macrolanguage" construct the relevant info is in the registry, not in the tag. The registry can be updated, e.g. replacing Macrolanguage "xx" by "aaa" in my example if ISO rearranges one set (xx-aaa, xx-aab, xx-aac, xx-bbb) into two sets (xx-aaa, xx-aaa-aab, xx-aaa-aac) plus (xx-bbb). Wrt the resources, I've no clue why e.g. (no, nb, nn) or (bs, hr, sr, sh) are recognized sets, while (de, gsw, nds) or similar groups aren't identified as related. It appears to be inconsistent. But as long as those sets are only identified in the registry, not in the tags, it's no serious problem to split, join, add, or remove sets later. Maybe we should limit the "extlang" business to sgn-* as a special non-Macrolanguage set. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 13 09:20:35 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVocU-0007UZ-EL; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:20:34 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVocT-0007UR-8g for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:20:33 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVocS-0007UI-V4 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:20:32 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVocR-0004ar-Mm for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:20:32 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IVocM-0001aw-I1; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:20:26 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:20:26 -0400 To: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Extlang stability (was: extlang) Message-ID: <20070913132026.GC16592@mercury.ccil.org> References: <20070620003819.GI12168@mercury.ccil.org> <fc7uab$cc2$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070912140051.GA15603@mercury.ccil.org> <30b660a20709121300p5667d131md58e7aaba1dd4ae1@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709121300p5667d131md58e7aaba1dd4ae1@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e1e48a527f609d1be2bc8d8a70eb76cb Cc: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mark Davis scripsit: > I disagree. The base information of whether an instance of written language > is in a given script is pretty clear, and the number of scripts are quite > bounded. While it may take some effort to determine whether a script is in > overwhelming usage for a language, it is a relatively straightforward task. c If it's so straightforward, why has nobody done it? We have some Suppress-Script entries for 639-2 languages, but by no means all, and the 639-3-only set is going to make the job ten times bigger. > On the other hand, the boundaries between languages (languages vs dialects > and so on) are always the subject of dispute. According to a conversation > with Ken Whistler, there is a considerable controversy among the linguistics > community over the language model used in SIL which then went into 639-3. It doesn't matter to us, the IETF; we are committed to doing whatever 639 does. > Now, this is not at all to say that they did a bad job -- they did a great > job, especially with the huge number of languages that they had to deal with > -- however, it is inherently a much more difficult task. And the whole > notion of macrolanguage is not something that exists "in the wild"; it is a > construct designed to enable certain usage patterns -- and it is up to us to > determine whether it fits best in 4646bis as the Macrolanguage: field or > hard-wired into extlang. That's why I'm proposing making the macrolanguage information fully available in the Macrolanguage: header, as mutable as SIL decides it needs to be, and then using the current state (plus the sign language case) for use in the extlang pattern. We have macrolanguages at all because of the vagaries of 639-2, but 639-2 is our core language set: we can't just deprecate all those languages in favor of obligatorily precise tagging. -- No, John. I want formats that are actually John Cowan useful, rather than over-featured megaliths that http://www.ccil.org/~cowan address all questions by piling on ridiculous cowan@ccil.org internal links in forms which are hideously over-complex. --Simon St. Laurent on xml-dev _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 13 09:24:17 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVog5-0002lc-D4; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:24:17 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVog4-0002lX-5V for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:24:16 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVog3-0002lP-S5 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:24:15 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVog1-0004fO-Pg for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:24:15 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IVog1-0001mk-B1; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:24:13 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:24:13 -0400 To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Extlang stability Message-ID: <20070913132413.GD16592@mercury.ccil.org> References: <20070912140051.GA15603@mercury.ccil.org> <fcb6rc$kj3$1@sea.gmane.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <fcb6rc$kj3$1@sea.gmane.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann scripsit: > Wrt the resources, I've no clue why e.g. (no, nb, nn) or (bs, hr, sr, > sh) are recognized sets, while (de, gsw, nds) or similar groups aren't > identified as related. It appears to be inconsistent. But as long as > those sets are only identified in the registry, not in the tags, it's > no serious problem to split, join, add, or remove sets later. Which is why I agree that the Macrolanguage: header is a Good Thing. The argument for extlang subtags (other than sign languages) is as a shim between 639-2 and 639-3 and nothing else. -- Not to perambulate John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> the corridors http://www.ccil.org/~cowan during the hours of repose in the boots of ascension. --Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 13 17:30:51 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVwGv-0002fL-Pv; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:30:49 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVwGu-0002fG-QX for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:30:48 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVwGu-0002f8-Al for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:30:48 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.179]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVwGs-00089y-R2 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:30:48 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j4so822623wah for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:30:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=WO0eCo8eV+wOAhBsPA6PaZsNOdhPpO9C7He4NQozqws=; b=JuyOH8TpNkjKViKiksgqMBbezhmHLrdGVJ+zwWzSyfBIWHWvvVMMfj6BMLgNII50mgDlvwGBO3pT+E79KLJXgp15IDrhDTk2fmF0GStemeS816B8jbadVtxvoDyfJ3MlcUz56A4PrPHuNIUcLzbO2aq/3BiLQzMbxEryCVhwKFQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=VvNoiKjaujBemriqUsUGhzVCYNV83j5CR4RMCFl9EnasQW3l/ZcFmdsZXpWgsb3huKguRhmf9beitbMxlMoAgxs9ALmD/nrnYf2zdlyNnHrmwMfI9qFkLvO9eAUTzbb7w7XLwRZ4jYbUrI9x06/o529IPl3upDrtSJRcUb/bOnw= Received: by 10.114.37.1 with SMTP id k1mr889934wak.1189719042896; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.196.12 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709131430p43d17a35s2cb60b0c24cf5c48@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:30:42 -0700 From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> To: "John Cowan" <cowan@ccil.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Extlang stability (was: extlang) In-Reply-To: <20070913132026.GC16592@mercury.ccil.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20070620003819.GI12168@mercury.ccil.org> <fc7uab$cc2$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070912140051.GA15603@mercury.ccil.org> <30b660a20709121300p5667d131md58e7aaba1dd4ae1@mail.gmail.com> <20070913132026.GC16592@mercury.ccil.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 17b90f70cbff69f9 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a87a9cdae4ac5d3fbeee75cd0026d632 Cc: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0379771248==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============0379771248== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_19536_23954799.1189719042894" ------=_Part_19536_23954799.1189719042894 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline First, I don't want to belabor the point about scripts, but it is easy to recognize when a particular language is written in a script. The harder part is determining usage. That is different from the language case, where as you know the boundaries between languages are *FAR* less well defined; as you go from one village to another you get accumulating differences that finally at some point you say constitute separate languages. As to macrolanguage, it appears that we are in general consensus on the usefulness of having the Macrolanguage field in the registry. The open issue is whether we also bake it into the extlang structure. I'm hoping that in the telecon we can make some progress on resolving that issue. Mark On 9/13/07, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote: > > Mark Davis scripsit: > > > I disagree. The base information of whether an instance of written > language > > is in a given script is pretty clear, and the number of scripts are > quite > > bounded. While it may take some effort to determine whether a script is > in > > overwhelming usage for a language, it is a relatively straightforward > task. > c > If it's so straightforward, why has nobody done it? We have some > Suppress-Script entries for 639-2 languages, but by no means all, > and the 639-3-only set is going to make the job ten times bigger. > > > On the other hand, the boundaries between languages (languages vs > dialects > > and so on) are always the subject of dispute. According to a > conversation > > with Ken Whistler, there is a considerable controversy among the > linguistics > > community over the language model used in SIL which then went into > 639-3. > > It doesn't matter to us, the IETF; we are committed to doing whatever > 639 does. > > > Now, this is not at all to say that they did a bad job -- they did a > great > > job, especially with the huge number of languages that they had to deal > with > > -- however, it is inherently a much more difficult task. And the whole > > notion of macrolanguage is not something that exists "in the wild"; it > is a > > construct designed to enable certain usage patterns -- and it is up to > us to > > determine whether it fits best in 4646bis as the Macrolanguage: field or > > hard-wired into extlang. > > That's why I'm proposing making the macrolanguage information fully > available in the Macrolanguage: header, as mutable as SIL decides it > needs to be, and then using the current state (plus the sign > language case) for use in the extlang pattern. We have macrolanguages > at all because of the vagaries of 639-2, but 639-2 is our core > language set: we can't just deprecate all those languages in favor > of obligatorily precise tagging. > > -- > No, John. I want formats that are actually John Cowan > useful, rather than over-featured megaliths that > http://www.ccil.org/~cowan > address all questions by piling on ridiculous cowan@ccil.org > internal links in forms which are hideously > over-complex. --Simon St. Laurent on xml-dev > -- Mark ------=_Part_19536_23954799.1189719042894 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline First, I don't want to belabor the point about scripts, but it is easy to recognize when a particular language is written in a script. The harder part is determining usage. That is different from the language case, where as you know the boundaries between languages are *FAR* less well defined; as you go from one village to another you get accumulating differences that finally at some point you say constitute separate languages. <br><br>As to macrolanguage, it appears that we are in general consensus on the usefulness of having the Macrolanguage field in the registry.<br><br>The open issue is whether we also bake it into the extlang structure. I'm hoping that in the telecon we can make some progress on resolving that issue. <br><br>Mark<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/13/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">John Cowan</b> <<a href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org">cowan@ccil.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Mark Davis scripsit:<br><br>> I disagree. The base information of whether an instance of written language<br>> is in a given script is pretty clear, and the number of scripts are quite<br>> bounded. While it may take some effort to determine whether a script is in <br>> overwhelming usage for a language, it is a relatively straightforward task.<br>c<br>If it's so straightforward, why has nobody done it?  We have some<br>Suppress-Script entries for 639-2 languages, but by no means all, <br>and the 639-3-only set is going to make the job ten times bigger.<br><br>> On the other hand, the boundaries between languages (languages vs dialects<br>> and so on) are always the subject of dispute. According to a conversation <br>> with Ken Whistler, there is a considerable controversy among the linguistics<br>> community over the language model used in SIL which then went into 639-3.<br><br>It doesn't matter to us, the IETF; we are committed to doing whatever <br>639 does.<br><br>> Now, this is not at all to say that they did a bad job -- they did a great<br>> job, especially with the huge number of languages that they had to deal with<br>> -- however, it is inherently a much more difficult task. And the whole <br>> notion of macrolanguage is not something that exists "in the wild"; it is a<br>> construct designed to enable certain usage patterns -- and it is up to us to<br>> determine whether it fits best in 4646bis as the Macrolanguage: field or <br>> hard-wired into extlang.<br><br>That's why I'm proposing making the macrolanguage information fully<br>available in the Macrolanguage: header, as mutable as SIL decides it<br>needs to be, and then using the current state (plus the sign <br>language case) for use in the extlang pattern.  We have macrolanguages<br>at all because of the vagaries of 639-2, but 639-2 is our core<br>language set: we can't just deprecate all those languages in favor<br>of obligatorily precise tagging. <br><br>--<br>No,  John.  I want formats that are actually       John Cowan<br>useful, rather than over-featured megaliths that   <a href="http://www.ccil.org/~cowan">http://www.ccil.org/~cowan</a><br>address all questions by piling on ridiculous       <a href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org">cowan@ccil.org</a><br>internal links in forms which are hideously<br>over-complex. --Simon St. Laurent on xml-dev<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Mark ------=_Part_19536_23954799.1189719042894-- --===============0379771248== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============0379771248==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 13 18:17:40 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVx0D-0007qR-QD; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:17:37 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IVx0D-0007qL-4t for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:17:37 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVx0C-0007qD-KK for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:17:36 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVx0B-0000bg-EK for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:17:36 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IVx07-0001Yt-9I; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:17:31 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:17:31 -0400 To: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Extlang stability (was: extlang) Message-ID: <20070913221731.GJ24279@mercury.ccil.org> References: <20070620003819.GI12168@mercury.ccil.org> <fc7uab$cc2$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070912140051.GA15603@mercury.ccil.org> <30b660a20709121300p5667d131md58e7aaba1dd4ae1@mail.gmail.com> <20070913132026.GC16592@mercury.ccil.org> <30b660a20709131430p43d17a35s2cb60b0c24cf5c48@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709131430p43d17a35s2cb60b0c24cf5c48@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a Cc: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mark Davis scripsit: > First, I don't want to belabor the point about scripts, but it is easy to > recognize when a particular language is written in a script. The harder part > is determining usage. That is different from the language case, where as you > know the boundaries between languages are *FAR* less well defined; as you go > from one village to another you get accumulating differences that finally at > some point you say constitute separate languages. All that's quite true, but I was making a different point, a procedural one. The ISO 639/RAs are in the business of making decisions about languages, so we (ietf-languages, specifically) need not be. Suppress-Script is IETF-specific, but nobody has stepped forward with the resources to make the decisions and (even more important) to review them. > As to macrolanguage, it appears that we are in general consensus on the > usefulness of having the Macrolanguage field in the registry. +1 > The open issue is whether we also bake it into the extlang structure. I'm > hoping that in the telecon we can make some progress on resolving that > issue. +1 -- John Cowan http://ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org Economists were put on this planet to make astrologers look good. --Leo McGarry _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 14 12:38:05 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWEBA-0002fG-K9; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:38:04 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWEB8-0002Qb-Ue for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:38:02 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWEB8-0002Ie-Cp for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:38:02 -0400 Received: from mta9.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.199]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWEB8-0003oC-0T for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:38:02 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta9.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070914163800.WRWB16948.mta9.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81>; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:38:00 -0400 Message-ID: <020701c7f6ed$9d765b10$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] [Mark.Wahl@informed-control.com: updated draft forOpenIDlanguage tags for attribute values] Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 09:38:00 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Martin Duerst <duerst at it dot aoyama dot ac dot jp> wrote: >> Chapter 16.9 of The Unicode Unicode Standard 5.0 says: >> "The use of these characters is strongly discouraged." >> Though one might argue that this protocol is a candidate >> for using them, I don't see any particular value to using them >> instead of a more structured protocol incorporating the ability >> to include "real" language tags. > > I fully and completely agree. These "tag" characters have been encoded > to get some people away from even worse ideas, but using them is still > a really bad idea. I've already lost enough street credibility trying to defend Plane 14 tags, so I won't go there again. I do note that if this draft represents the practice of a group that is already using Plane 14 tags, they might not appreciate the language-tagging group telling them they need to change their protocol. Also, these are just Unicode characters; it is no more a "binary encoding" than ordinary ASCII characters would be. My only other comment, again outside the scope of the language-tagging group, is that it's annoying to see pseudocode or "sample implementations" that show how to encode something in UTF-16 or UTF-8 in every document that uses UTF-16 or UTF-8. This is not only unnecessary in 2007, but error-prone. Just reference Unicode, or ISO 10646, or RFC 2781 and/or 3629, and be done with it. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 14 12:47:59 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWEKg-0000MR-Ix; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:47:54 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWEKf-0000Jg-71 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:47:53 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWEKe-0000JY-TT for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:47:52 -0400 Received: from mta9.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.199]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWEKd-0002io-LD for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:47:52 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta9.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070914164750.XIKB16948.mta9.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:47:50 -0400 Message-ID: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 09:47:51 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 2.4 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: > I've now updated 4645bis.awk to convert NCRs to UTF-8, see > http://xyzzy.webhop.info/home/ltru/4645bis.awk > > The script can extract an UTF-8 language subtag registry from Doug's > drafts, and it can also convert 4646 registries to UTF-8. > > As John said: _doom_ Doom? Because 22 characters, about 0.025% of the Registry, don't display correctly by default in your Web browser? > When I try to open a plain text UTF-8 file with Firefox 2 under Win XP > I've to set the encoding manually (unless I add a BOM). The UTF-8 version at http://www.langtag.net/registries/language-subtag-registry-utf8 looks fine to me under Firefox 2.0.0.6, IE 6, and IE 7, all under Windows XP SP2. Locally saved files may not behave the same under all browsers. > When I convert an UTF-8 registry to XML and use the "file upload" > interface of the W3C validator I run into several fatal errors at the > W3C validator. XMLSpy 2006 Home Edition thought it was fine. > Unless I use the "hard" character encoding override option at the > validator. Arguably it's the fault of Firefox 2 under Win XP to use > Content-Tye: text/xml without charset in its file upload header for > 4645bisU.xml. But in practice it's as it is, both FF2 and the W3C > validator ignore encoding="UTF-8" in the 1st line <?xml version="1.0" > encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?> Not arguably; you are *definitely* supposed to be able to use UTF-8 in properly marked XML documents. But in any case, this is an XML issue and not an issue with the Registry itself, which is in record-jar format. If you have problems with UTF-8 in XML, then perhaps your process that converts record-jar to XML also needs to convert UTF-8 to hex NCRs. > I'm not yet sure that I got the NCR to UTF-8 conversions right. Then we know nothing, really. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 14 13:59:15 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWFRj-0007FR-3k; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:59:15 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWFRi-0007Ez-39 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:59:14 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWFRh-0007El-P6 for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:59:13 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.61]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWFRg-00055B-FC for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:59:13 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=IlSK9Ihr13eMKz76s8eklBTogmtq9OVJS/W94dNnOldrYXgXPugDjwhsW4exp1NN; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [68.166.189.190] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1IWFRf-0004MF-Rr for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:59:12 -0400 Message-ID: <007701c7f6f9$62f8a360$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <020701c7f6ed$9d765b10$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Subject: Re: [Ltru] [Mark.Wahl@informed-control.com: updated draftforOpenIDlanguage tags for attribute values] Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:02:16 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888fa44b31bb60a93567612a50c2cf060e03c8f4085990969fa350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 68.166.189.190 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi - > From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> > To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 9:38 AM > Subject: Re: [Ltru] [Mark.Wahl@informed-control.com: updated draftforOpenIDlanguage tags for attribute values] ... > >> Chapter 16.9 of The Unicode Unicode Standard 5.0 says: ... > I do note that if this draft > represents the practice of a group that is already using Plane 14 tags, > they might not appreciate the language-tagging group telling them they > need to change their protocol. We in ltru don't have any say about the use of Plane 14 tags. Those are specified by the Unicode, and are merely based on the syntax defined by this WG. However, when the people who *are* responsible for Plane 14, namely the Unicode Consortium, say "don't do this", it might be a good idea to listen to them. For a definitive answer he should talk to the Unicode people directly. Randy _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 15 10:02:02 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWYDe-0006yH-Az; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:01:58 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWYDd-0006y5-G9 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:01:57 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWYDc-0006xn-Gv for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:01:57 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWYDa-0001cp-UG for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:01:56 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWYDU-0004lo-2G for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 16:01:48 +0200 Received: from 1cust236.tnt2.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.12.236]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 16:01:48 +0200 Received: from nobody by 1cust236.tnt2.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 16:01:48 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 16:01:20 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 21 Message-ID: <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com><004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer><46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com><30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust236.tnt2.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Randy Presuhn wrote: >> From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> [...] >> How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific = Time. >> = http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=3D9&day=3D26&y= ear=3D2007&hour=3D9&min=3D0&sec=3D0&p1=3D224 > Any of those would work for me, but Wednesday would be best That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for LTRU is apparently working, xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org The log would be available below=20 http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/ Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 15 13:24:54 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWbO2-0002kM-JW; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:24:54 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWbO2-0002i2-59 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:24:54 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWbO1-0002hj-RT for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:24:53 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWbO0-0006xo-5X for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:24:53 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWbN0-0007Ol-Tu for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:23:50 +0200 Received: from 1cust236.tnt2.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.12.236]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:23:50 +0200 Received: from nobody by 1cust236.tnt2.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:23:50 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:22:51 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 69 Message-ID: <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust236.tnt2.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4b800b1eab964a31702fa68f1ff0e955 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Doug Ewell wrote: =20 > The UTF-8 version at=20 > http://www.langtag.net/registries/language-subtag-registry-utf8 looks=20 > fine to me Stephane's server "knows" that it's UTF-8 and sends a corresponding header field Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DUTF-8 It's an ordinary Apache server, therefore it "knows" how to get this right because Stephane said so manually in a configuration file. BTW, this version uses LF instead of CrLf for lineends, I get garbage when I look at it with the admittedly simple MS editor. When I use Wordpad to look at a local copy the lineends are fine, but the UTF-8 is ignored. The first test entry is the description for "nb", that should be Bokm=C3=A5l, not Bokm=C3=83=C2=A5l. =20 > Locally saved files may not behave the same under all browsers. Or text editors. Or Web servers. Not all users know how to set the character encoding manually, or they can't because it's not their own server. With a BOM the effects might be somewhat more predictable for simple Windows tools, under W2K it helps with the MS editor but not Wordpad. >> When I convert an UTF-8 registry to XML and use the "file upload"=20 >> interface of the W3C validator I run into several fatal errors at >> the W3C validator. =20 > XMLSpy 2006 Home Edition thought it was fine. >From my POV it's the same issue with the "URL" interface of the W3C vaidator, because the used Web server sends the XML file as text/xml without charset, example (1175 KB): http://xyzzy.webhop.info/home/ltru/4645bisU.xml =20 >> Arguably it's the fault of Firefox 2 under Win XP to use=20 >> Content-Tye: text/xml without charset in its file upload header for=20 >> 4645bisU.xml. But in practice it's as it is, both FF2 and the W3C=20 >> validator ignore encoding=3D"UTF-8" in the 1st line >> <?xml version=3D"1.0" encoding=3D"UTF-8" standalone=3D"yes" ?> > Not arguably; you are *definitely* supposed to be able to use UTF-8 > in properly marked XML documents. The W3C validator is tuned to get the encoding right for HTML 4 or XHTML documents, long story, short summary: For text/xml it assumes ASCII (so far that's correct) and ignores the encoding in the XML declaration (and that's an oddity). > this is an XML issue and not an issue with the Registry itself, > which is in record-jar format. No, it's an issue with the source format. The US-ASCII XML based on a record-jar registry with hex. NCRs works as is. The UTF-8 XML based on an UTF-8 record-jar registry does not work as is. =20 >> I'm not yet sure that I got the NCR to UTF-8 conversions right. > Then we know nothing, really. FWIW when I compare Stephane's language-subtag-regitry-utf8 with the output of gawk -f 4645bis.awk lstr709.txt > lstr709U.txt they are identical (modulo lineends). I also know nothing about the conversion from the ISO 639-3 UTF-8 input to record-jar with NCRs, do you have a test suite ? =20 =20 Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 15 13:56:51 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWbsu-0004eq-AD; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:56:48 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWbss-0004ef-KJ for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:56:46 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWbss-0004eX-Ad for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:56:46 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.183]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWbsq-0007UV-UB for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:56:46 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j4so1523442wah for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:56:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=HD+9YBcIYN7IyqsaTDJjhtUn140LBUw8ifW3NBg2lhw=; b=b/qTNt4BpS7ELqyoFVRqGSSpllimbPvs/WyCLIRXNV9WV6wXHOSRIjswjibuN06zPztBb/E0Y+PZuaj6H7uTXtRV8BBuVAHH5YiCYFZMVETGKGj247iGLIacZ+BK1rdaCcbRiXsip3s+0w0Us8XM30vxIL2dU8VUSsZ19z1EPRA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=tJPREYVAleEyOdu1jvzinJyxn8DDDlmXdRiBzlqMDLPGut82GqDCYIzKWJiZTd9ceUx7VmUnEb3FVAXgKWi/ks9iEKr/WJ327Z2Hxpx2fcANmxsvlsGHA5W7RwDiOEffzBDMSgeEVne4bSGzJTHzEXkg6bxd59hFj20pbFzkrNc= Received: by 10.115.17.1 with SMTP id u1mr1390617wai.1189879003540; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.196.12 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709151056o7ccdb949g117363f469ee37b2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 11:56:43 -0600 From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> To: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? In-Reply-To: <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8a27d6aa55486150 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52f7a77164458f8c7b36b66787c853da Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1862691680==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============1862691680== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6045_20886972.1189879003534" ------=_Part_6045_20886972.1189879003534 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sounds great. We should go ahead and schedule another meeting the next week -- in case we need it, and also so that we can pull in Peter, if he can't make the first one.. Mark On 9/15/07, Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote: > > Randy Presuhn wrote: > > >> From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> > [...] > >> How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific > Time. > >> > http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 > > > Any of those would work for me, but Wednesday would be best > > That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for > LTRU is apparently working, xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org > > The log would be available below > http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/ > > Frank > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > -- Mark ------=_Part_6045_20886972.1189879003534 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline <div>Sounds great. We should go ahead and schedule another meeting the next week -- in case we need it, and also so that we can pull in Peter, if he can't make the first one..</div> <div> </div> <div>Mark<br><br> </div> <div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/15/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Frank Ellermann</b> <<a href="mailto:nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de">nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de</a>> wrote:</span> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Randy Presuhn wrote:<br><br>>> From: "Mark Davis" <<a href="mailto:mark.davis@icu-project.org"> mark.davis@icu-project.org</a>><br>[...]<br>>> How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific Time.<br>>> <a href="http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224"> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224</a><br><br>> Any of those would work for me, but Wednesday would be best<br><br>That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for <br>LTRU is apparently working, <a href="mailto:xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org">xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org</a><br><br>The log would be available below<br><a href="http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/">http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/ </a><br><br>Frank<br><br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Ltru mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ltru@ietf.org">Ltru@ietf.org</a><br><a href="https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru">https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru </a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Mark ------=_Part_6045_20886972.1189879003534-- --===============1862691680== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============1862691680==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 15 19:31:11 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWh6Q-0001P8-3G; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:31:06 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWh6O-0001P2-CT for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:31:04 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWh6O-0001Ou-0w for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:31:04 -0400 Received: from mta13.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.44]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWh6N-0003pi-BZ for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:31:03 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta13.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070915233102.SBYC4108.mta13.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:31:02 -0400 Message-ID: <001501c7f7f0$7acf34c0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 16:31:02 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 2.4 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 9a2be21919e71dc6faef12b370c4ecf5 Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: > Stephane's server "knows" that it's UTF-8 and sends a corresponding > header field Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > It's an ordinary Apache server, therefore it "knows" how to get this > right because Stephane said so manually in a configuration file. Which proves that some tools that are designed and configured to work with UTF-8 can do so. > BTW, this version uses LF instead of CrLf for lineends, I get garbage > when I look at it with the admittedly simple MS editor. Section 3.1 of RFC 4646 specifies that records in the Registry are supposed to end with CRLF, not LF or anything else. Of course, we know that some data-transfer protocols arrogantly convert CRLF to LF (or vice versa) anyway, and there's really not much we can do to change that. > When I use Wordpad to look at a local copy the lineends are fine, but > the UTF-8 is ignored. The first test entry is the description for > "nb", that should be BokmÃl, not BokmÃÂl. Which proves that some tools that are *not* designed to work with UTF-8 *cannot* do so (including, evidently, not only WordPad but also the Web interface to the LTRU mail archive). >> Locally saved files may not behave the same under all browsers. > > Or text editors. Or Web servers. Not all users know how to set the > character encoding manually, or they can't because it's not their own > server. > > With a BOM the effects might be somewhat more predictable for simple > Windows tools, under W2K it helps with the MS editor but not Wordpad. UTF-8 support isn't magic. Programs and protocols have to be designed to support UTF-8, or they can't be expected to do so. But I still assert that the number of tools that can interpret and display characters encoded as UTF-8 correctly, without manual intervention, in a non-XML, non-HTML text file, is greater than the number of tools that will do the same for characters encoded as hex NCRs. > From my POV it's the same issue with the "URL" interface of the W3C > vaidator, because the used Web server sends the XML file as text/xml > without charset, example (1175 KB): > http://xyzzy.webhop.info/home/ltru/4645bisU.xml As soon as you convert the Registry from its native record-jar format to XML or some other format, you assume responsibility for making the XML data work with existing XML tools. If you wanted to convert it to CSV for import into Excel, you would have to make sure items with embedded commas were suitably quoted. If you wanted to convert it to Access, you would have to deal with whatever Access makes you deal with. And so forth. Converting the Registry from record-jar to something else either (a) is our problem, in which case we need to specify rules and guidelines for making it work, or (b) is not, in which case it is not. > The W3C validator is tuned to get the encoding right for HTML 4 or > XHTML documents, long story, short summary: For text/xml it assumes > ASCII (so far that's correct) and ignores the encoding in the XML > declaration (and that's an oddity). I'm sorry that you are experiencing browser and/or protocol problems getting an XML document encoded in UTF-8 to display or validate correctly. I do not see what this has to do the record-jar Registry. >> this is an XML issue and not an issue with the Registry itself, which >> is in record-jar format. > > No, it's an issue with the source format. The US-ASCII XML based on a > record-jar registry with hex. NCRs works as is. The UTF-8 XML based > on an UTF-8 record-jar registry does not work as is. Then you need to change the conversion process. Our purpose in using record-jar is not solely to provide a format that is directly convertible to XML. If it were, we'd be better off just using XML in the first place, and we've already had that debate many times. > FWIW when I compare Stephane's language-subtag-regitry-utf8 with the > output of gawk -f 4645bis.awk lstr709.txt > lstr709U.txt they are > identical (modulo lineends). Actually, I'm sure your NCR-to-UTF-8 conversions are fine, although I haven't checked them. > I also know nothing about the conversion from the ISO 639-3 UTF-8 > input to record-jar with NCRs, do you have a test suite ? I wrote a program to convert the 639-3 data to Registry format, including the conversion from UTF-8 to hex NCRs for insertion into the I-D (the opposite of the transformation that I'm suggesting you perform). I haven't written a test suite or back-conversion programs to see if I did the job right. That's why I asked the list last week to review the 4645bis draft and send comments. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 15 21:24:50 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWisT-000188-4G; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:24:49 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWisS-000182-KM for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:24:48 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWisS-00017r-AK for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:24:48 -0400 Received: from smtp.microsoft.com ([131.107.115.215]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWisQ-0007Tk-Va for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:24:48 -0400 Received: from tk5-exhub-c103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.70.186) by TK5-EXGWY-E802.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.177.2; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:24:46 -0700 Received: from NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.62.44]) by tk5-exhub-c103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.70.186]) with mapi; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:24:46 -0700 From: Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com> To: "ltru@lists.ietf.org" <ltru@lists.ietf.org> Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:24:43 -0700 Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Thread-Topic: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Thread-Index: Acf3wc0muLGh5sdCRfaarvPEL/eDOwAPnWbQ Message-ID: <DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561AC0E353C@NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> <30b660a20709151056o7ccdb949g117363f469ee37b2@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709151056o7ccdb949g117363f469ee37b2@mail.gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: -8.0 (--------) X-Scan-Signature: ff03b0075c3fc728d7d60a15b4ee1ad2 Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1529371318==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============1529371318== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561AC0E353CNAEXMSGC117re_" --_000_DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561AC0E353CNAEXMSGC117re_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SSBkbyBub3QgZXhwZWN0IHRvIGJlIGFibGUgdG8gcGFydGljaXBhdGUgaW4gYSBtZWV0aW5nIHVu dGlsIG9uIG9yIGFmdGVyIE9jdC4gMS4NCg0KDQpQZXRlcg0KDQpGcm9tOiBNYXJrIERhdmlzIFtt YWlsdG86bWFyay5kYXZpc0BpY3UtcHJvamVjdC5vcmddDQpTZW50OiBTdW5kYXksIFNlcHRlbWJl ciAxNiwgMjAwNyAxOjU3IEFNDQpUbzogRnJhbmsgRWxsZXJtYW5uDQpDYzogbHRydUBsaXN0cy5p ZXRmLm9yZw0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFtMdHJ1XSBSZTogUmU6IDcwdGggSUVURiAtIGx0cnUgc2Vz c2lvbj8NCg0KU291bmRzIGdyZWF0LiBXZSBzaG91bGQgZ28gYWhlYWQgYW5kIHNjaGVkdWxlIGFu b3RoZXIgbWVldGluZyB0aGUgbmV4dCB3ZWVrIC0tIGluIGNhc2Ugd2UgbmVlZCBpdCwgYW5kIGFs c28gc28gdGhhdCB3ZSBjYW4gcHVsbCBpbiBQZXRlciwgaWYgaGUgY2FuJ3QgbWFrZSB0aGUgZmly c3Qgb25lLi4NCg0KTWFyaw0KDQoNCk9uIDkvMTUvMDcsIEZyYW5rIEVsbGVybWFubiA8bm9ib2R5 QHh5enp5LmNsYXJhbmV0LmRlPG1haWx0bzpub2JvZHlAeHl6enkuY2xhcmFuZXQuZGU+PiB3cm90 ZToNClJhbmR5IFByZXN1aG4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj4+IEZyb206ICJNYXJrIERhdmlzIiA8IG1hcmsu ZGF2aXNAaWN1LXByb2plY3Qub3JnPG1haWx0bzptYXJrLmRhdmlzQGljdS1wcm9qZWN0Lm9yZz4+ DQpbLi4uXQ0KPj4gSG93IGFib3V0IFdlZCwgVGh1LCBvciBGcmkgb2YgdGhhdCB3ZWVrLCBhdCA4 OjAwIG9yIDk6MDAgYW0gUGFjaWZpYyBUaW1lLg0KPj4gaHR0cDovL3d3dy50aW1lYW5kZGF0ZS5j b20vd29ybGRjbG9jay9maXhlZHRpbWUuaHRtbD9tb250aD05JmRheT0yNiZ5ZWFyPTIwMDcmaG91 cj05Jm1pbj0wJnNlYz0wJnAxPTIyNA0KDQo+IEFueSBvZiB0aG9zZSB3b3VsZCB3b3JrIGZvciBt ZSwgYnV0IFdlZG5lc2RheSB3b3VsZCBiZSBiZXN0DQoNClRoYXQncyAxNjowMFogb3IgMTg6MDAg aW4gY2VudHJhbCBFdXJvcGUuIFRoZSBKYWJiZXIgcm9vbSBmb3INCkxUUlUgaXMgYXBwYXJlbnRs eSB3b3JraW5nLCB4bXBwOmx0cnVAamFiYmVyLmlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzp4bXBwOmx0cnVAamFi YmVyLmlldGYub3JnPg0KDQpUaGUgbG9nIHdvdWxkIGJlIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBiZWxvdw0KaHR0cDov L3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tZWV0aW5ncy9pZXRmLWxvZ3MvbHRydS8NCg0KRnJhbmsNCg0KDQoNCg0K DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KTHRydSBt YWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCkx0cnVAaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOkx0cnVAaWV0Zi5vcmc+DQpodHRwczov L3d3dzEuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9sdHJ1DQoNCg0KDQotLQ0KTWFyaw0K --_000_DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561AC0E353CNAEXMSGC117re_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWlj cm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcv VFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQoNCjxoZWFkPg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj1Db250ZW50LVR5cGUg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9R2VuZXJhdG9y IGNvbnRlbnQ9Ik1pY3Jvc29mdCBXb3JkIDEyIChmaWx0ZXJlZCBtZWRpdW0pIj4NCjxzdHlsZT4N CjwhLS0NCiAvKiBGb250IERlZmluaXRpb25zICovDQogQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWls eToiQ29yZGlhIE5ldyI7DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6MiAxMSAzIDQgMiAyIDIgMiAyIDQ7fQ0KQGZvbnQt ZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FtYnJpYSBNYXRoIjsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDQgNSAzIDUg NCA2IDMgMiA0O30NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5vc2Ut MToyIDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlRhaG9t YTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDExIDYgNCAzIDUgNCA0IDIgNDt9DQogLyogU3R5bGUgRGVmaW5pdGlv bnMgKi8NCiBwLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgbGkuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBkaXYuTXNvTm9ybWFsDQoJe21hcmdp bjowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAwMXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMi4wcHQ7DQoJZm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6IlRpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbiIsInNlcmlmIjt9DQphOmxpbmssIHNwYW4uTXNvSHlw ZXJsaW5rDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgljb2xvcjpibHVlOw0KCXRleHQtZGVj b3JhdGlvbjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQ0KYTp2aXNpdGVkLCBzcGFuLk1zb0h5cGVybGlua0ZvbGxvd2Vk DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgljb2xvcjpwdXJwbGU7DQoJdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0 aW9uOnVuZGVybGluZTt9DQpzcGFuLmdtYWlscXVvdGUNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLW5hbWU6Z21haWxf cXVvdGU7fQ0Kc3Bhbi5FbWFpbFN0eWxlMTgNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6cGVyc29uYWwtcmVw bHk7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjsNCgljb2xvcjojMUY0OTdE O30NCi5Nc29DaHBEZWZhdWx0DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOmV4cG9ydC1vbmx5O30NCkBwYWdl IFNlY3Rpb24xDQoJe3NpemU6OC41aW4gMTEuMGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbjoxLjBpbiAxLjBpbiAxLjBp biAxLjBpbjt9DQpkaXYuU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7cGFnZTpTZWN0aW9uMTt9DQotLT4NCjwvc3R5bGU+ DQo8IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+PHhtbD4NCiA8bzpzaGFwZWRlZmF1bHRzIHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0 IiBzcGlkbWF4PSIxMDI2IiAvPg0KPC94bWw+PCFbZW5kaWZdLS0+PCEtLVtpZiBndGUgbXNvIDld Pjx4bWw+DQogPG86c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiPg0KICA8bzppZG1hcCB2OmV4dD0i ZWRpdCIgZGF0YT0iMSIgLz4NCiA8L286c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQ+PC94bWw+PCFbZW5kaWZdLS0+DQo8 L2hlYWQ+DQoNCjxib2R5IGxhbmc9RU4tVVMgbGluaz1ibHVlIHZsaW5rPXB1cnBsZT4NCg0KPGRp diBjbGFzcz1TZWN0aW9uMT4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSdmb250 LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7DQpjb2xvcjoj MUY0OTdEJz5JIGRvIG5vdCBleHBlY3QgdG8gYmUgYWJsZSB0byBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0ZSBpbiBhIG1l ZXRpbmcgdW50aWwgb24NCm9yIGFmdGVyIE9jdC4gMS48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQoN CjxwIGNsYXNzPU1zb05vcm1hbD48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0nZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZh bWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsInNhbnMtc2VyaWYiOw0KY29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCc+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8 L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KDQo8cCBjbGFzcz1Nc29Ob3JtYWw+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9J2ZvbnQt c2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjsNCmNvbG9yOiMx RjQ5N0QnPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFs PjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSdmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIiwic2Fu cy1zZXJpZiI7DQpjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEJz5QZXRlcjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCg0K PHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSdmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7DQpjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEJz48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwv bzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQoNCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9J2JvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci10b3A6c29s aWQgI0I1QzRERiAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjMuMHB0IDBpbiAwaW4gMGluJz4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9 TXNvTm9ybWFsPjxiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSdmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJU YWhvbWEiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIic+RnJvbTo8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxzcGFuDQpzdHlsZT0nZm9udC1z aXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGFob21hIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiInPiBNYXJrIERhdmlz DQpbbWFpbHRvOm1hcmsuZGF2aXNAaWN1LXByb2plY3Qub3JnXSA8YnI+DQo8Yj5TZW50OjwvYj4g U3VuZGF5LCBTZXB0ZW1iZXIgMTYsIDIwMDcgMTo1NyBBTTxicj4NCjxiPlRvOjwvYj4gRnJhbmsg RWxsZXJtYW5uPGJyPg0KPGI+Q2M6PC9iPiBsdHJ1QGxpc3RzLmlldGYub3JnPGJyPg0KPGI+U3Vi amVjdDo8L2I+IFJlOiBbTHRydV0gUmU6IFJlOiA3MHRoIElFVEYgLSBsdHJ1IHNlc3Npb24/PG86 cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KDQo8L2Rpdj4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPjxvOnA+ Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KDQo8ZGl2Pg0KDQo8cCBjbGFzcz1Nc29Ob3JtYWw+U291bmRzIGdy ZWF0LiBXZSBzaG91bGQgZ28gYWhlYWQgYW5kIHNjaGVkdWxlIGFub3RoZXINCm1lZXRpbmcgdGhl IG5leHQgd2VlayAtLSBpbiBjYXNlIHdlIG5lZWQgaXQsIGFuZCBhbHNvIHNvIHRoYXQgd2UgY2Fu IHB1bGwgaW4NClBldGVyLCBpZiBoZSBjYW4ndCBtYWtlIHRoZSBmaXJzdCBvbmUuLjxvOnA+PC9v OnA+PC9wPg0KDQo8L2Rpdj4NCg0KPGRpdj4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPiZuYnNwOzxv OnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KDQo8L2Rpdj4NCg0KPGRpdj4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPk1h cms8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQombmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCg0KPC9kaXY+DQoNCjxkaXY+DQoN CjxwIGNsYXNzPU1zb05vcm1hbD48c3BhbiBjbGFzcz1nbWFpbHF1b3RlPk9uIDkvMTUvMDcsIDxi PkZyYW5rIEVsbGVybWFubjwvYj4NCiZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86bm9ib2R5QHh5enp5LmNs YXJhbmV0LmRlIj5ub2JvZHlAeHl6enkuY2xhcmFuZXQuZGU8L2E+Jmd0Ow0Kd3JvdGU6PC9zcGFu PiA8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPlJhbmR5IFByZXN1aG4gd3Jv dGU6PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KJmd0OyZndDsgRnJvbTogJnF1b3Q7TWFyayBEYXZpcyZxdW90OyAmbHQ7 PGENCmhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzptYXJrLmRhdmlzQGljdS1wcm9qZWN0Lm9yZyI+IG1hcmsuZGF2aXNA aWN1LXByb2plY3Qub3JnPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQpbLi4uXTxicj4NCiZndDsmZ3Q7IEhvdyBhYm91 dCBXZWQsIFRodSwgb3IgRnJpIG9mIHRoYXQgd2VlaywgYXQgODowMCBvciA5OjAwIGFtIFBhY2lm aWMNClRpbWUuPGJyPg0KJmd0OyZndDsgPGENCmhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cudGltZWFuZGRhdGUu Y29tL3dvcmxkY2xvY2svZml4ZWR0aW1lLmh0bWw/bW9udGg9OSZhbXA7ZGF5PTI2JmFtcDt5ZWFy PTIwMDcmYW1wO2hvdXI9OSZhbXA7bWluPTAmYW1wO3NlYz0wJmFtcDtwMT0yMjQiPmh0dHA6Ly93 d3cudGltZWFuZGRhdGUuY29tL3dvcmxkY2xvY2svZml4ZWR0aW1lLmh0bWw/bW9udGg9OSZhbXA7 ZGF5PTI2JmFtcDt5ZWFyPTIwMDcmYW1wO2hvdXI9OSZhbXA7bWluPTAmYW1wO3NlYz0wJmFtcDtw MT0yMjQ8L2E+PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBBbnkgb2YgdGhvc2Ugd291bGQgd29yayBmb3IgbWUs IGJ1dCBXZWRuZXNkYXkgd291bGQgYmUgYmVzdDxicj4NCjxicj4NClRoYXQncyAxNjowMFogb3Ig MTg6MDAgaW4gY2VudHJhbCBFdXJvcGUuIFRoZSBKYWJiZXIgcm9vbSBmb3IgPGJyPg0KTFRSVSBp cyBhcHBhcmVudGx5IHdvcmtpbmcsIDxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzp4bXBwOmx0cnVAamFiYmVyLmll dGYub3JnIj54bXBwOmx0cnVAamFiYmVyLmlldGYub3JnPC9hPjxicj4NCjxicj4NClRoZSBsb2cg d291bGQgYmUgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGJlbG93PGJyPg0KPGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9y Zy9tZWV0aW5ncy9pZXRmLWxvZ3MvbHRydS8iPmh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWVldGluZ3Mv aWV0Zi1sb2dzL2x0cnUvDQo8L2E+PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KRnJhbms8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8 YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fXzxicj4NCkx0cnUgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0PGJyPg0KPGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOkx0cnVA aWV0Zi5vcmciPkx0cnVAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+PGJyPg0KPGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cxLmll dGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbHRydSI+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cxLmlldGYub3JnL21haWxt YW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbHRydQ0KPC9hPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KDQo8L2Rpdj4NCg0KPHAgY2xh c3M9TXNvTm9ybWFsPjxicj4NCjxiciBjbGVhcj1hbGw+DQo8YnI+DQotLSA8YnI+DQpNYXJrIDxv OnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KDQo8L2Rpdj4NCg0KPC9ib2R5Pg0KDQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561AC0E353CNAEXMSGC117re_-- --===============1529371318== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============1529371318==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 15 23:22:43 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWkiY-0004rq-Fg; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 23:22:42 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWkiW-0004hk-SI for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 23:22:40 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWkiW-0004ey-G4 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 23:22:40 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWkiU-0000xA-Pp for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 23:22:40 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWkiI-0007iz-9e for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 05:22:26 +0200 Received: from 1cust245.tnt3.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.14.245]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 05:22:26 +0200 Received: from nobody by 1cust245.tnt3.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 05:22:26 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 05:22:05 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 92 Message-ID: <fci7h1$5t0$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <001501c7f7f0$7acf34c0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust245.tnt3.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b5d20af10c334b36874c0264b10f59f1 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Doug Ewell wrote: =20 > some tools that are designed and configured to work with UTF-8 > can do so. No surprise here, I worry about tools which are not designed or not configured to work with UTF-8. The hex. NCRs are robuster with arbitrary tools. > some tools that are *not* designed to work with UTF-8 *cannot* > do so (including, evidently, not only WordPad but also the Web=20 > interface to the LTRU mail archive). Ugh... http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.ltru/8492/raw is what I sent, QP UTF-8 =3DC3=3DA5 for aring http://purl.net/net/ucode/e5 It's still okay in the current mbox file of the IETF archive, =3DC3=3DA5 in ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/ltru/current In the corresponding Web server document it's shown as à http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg08509.html Apparently a bug near the Web interface to the list archive (?) =20 > I still assert that the number of tools that can interpret and=20 > display characters encoded as UTF-8 correctly, without manual=20 > intervention, in a non-XML, non-HTML text file, is greater than > the number of tools that will do the same for characters=20 > encoded as hex NCRs. There should be no tool at all displaying a plain text file with hex. NCRs as Unicode without manual intervention. And that's the point, the hex. NCRs can't be interpreted or misinterpreted without some obvious and manual intervention of registry users. But it's very easy to run into obscure bugs with 3rd party tools for a plain text UTF-8 file without manual intervention. So far we have identified an IETF list interface, the W3C validator=20 (for UTF-8 XML), modern browsers like FF2, and some Win editors, where plain text UTF-8 doesn't work without manual intervention. > I'm sorry that you are experiencing browser and/or protocol > problems getting an XML document encoded in UTF-8 to display > or validate correctly. I do not see what this has to do the > record-jar Registry. I don't have these problems with encoding=3D"US-ASCII" based on the robust 4646 record-jar input. I run into these problems using a hypothetical 4646bis UTF-8 registry and precisely the same tool (after s/US-ASCII/UTF-8/ in its XML declaration). Of course I could convert 4646bis UTF-8 to 4646 hex. NCRs, and then create encoding=3D"US-ASCII" XML, but that's an odd approach. Something like http://purl.net/xyzzy/src/ncrify.cmd isn't what you find everywhere. > Our purpose in using record-jar is not solely to provide a=20 > format that is directly convertible to XML. If it were, we'd > be better off just using XML in the first place, and we've=20 > already had that debate many times. I'm on record with saying that UTF-8 *_requires_* XML for some time now. The purpose of record-jar with hex. NCRs was that it works on all platforms with all tools as expected and as is. It's even possible to display the RFC 4646 record-jar format correctly with modern browsers after adding only two lines. > I haven't written a test suite or back-conversion programs to=20 > see if I did the job right. That's why I asked the list last > week to review the 4645bis draft and send comments. The references are as always okay, the input is apparently the 2007-07-17 639-3 version (I checked some new + retired subtags), and the NCRs are in the range upto u+10FFFF, otherwise my script would throw an error. If there's a problem in the UTF-8 input it's no LTRU problem. If you have an UTF-8 proto-registry we could compare it with my gawk -f 4645bis output, and if that's identical your NCR encoder and my NCR decoder agree. I get an UTF-8 registry with filedate 2029-09-09, file size 698043, and MD5sum 43443a34cbb996a3e5a42ed551ef803f No special observation in the prose of your I-D. For the source (the 639-3 Web site) I'd wish that they show the outcome of the modification requests (approved or not) directly in their list, not only in the "more" details per request. There are quite a lot of modifications, almost 400 in two years, 128 resolved (=3D reflected in your I-D). If that continues with a bulk update once per year the language subtag reviewer will be rather busy at this time of the year. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sun Sep 16 15:32:17 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWzql-0003Sz-VG; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 15:32:11 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IWzqk-0003So-V9 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 15:32:10 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWzqk-0003Sb-Kr for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 15:32:10 -0400 Received: from virtual3.netaktiv.com ([80.67.170.53] helo=mail.bortzmeyer.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWzqj-0002E1-8k for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 15:32:10 -0400 Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 59F6224080E; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:32:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 20C30105DD; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:27:18 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:27:18 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 07:22:51PM +0200, Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote=20 a message of 76 lines which said: > When I use Wordpad to look at a local copy the lineends are fine, > but the UTF-8 is ignored. The first test entry is the description > for "nb", that should be Bokm=E5l, not Bokm=C3=A5l. It seems there is nothing new here. Without meta-data such as HTTP's Content-type, an editor has no way to know if a file is in ISO 8859-1, ISO 8859-2, UTF-8, etc. There are tricks like Emacs variables at the end of the file, or some heuristics can be used but there is no good way to be sure. It is certainly a big issue for all text formats where there is no structure to indicate the encoding but it is not a new issue. XML does not have this problem because there is a standard way to specify the encoding in the file itself. > The W3C validator is tuned to get the encoding right for HTML 4 or > XHTML documents, long story, short summary: For text/xml it assumes > ASCII (so far that's correct) and ignores the encoding in the XML > declaration (and that's an oddity). If it's true, it is a major bug, which should be reported ASAP. =20 _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sun Sep 16 17:20:13 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX1XI-0001fe-Tl; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:20:12 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IX1XH-0001fY-AR for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:20:11 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX1XH-0001fQ-0W for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:20:11 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX1XF-0004j8-Ao for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:20:10 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IX1X5-0004ha-Ue for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:19:59 +0200 Received: from 1cust224.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.10.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:19:59 +0200 Received: from nobody by 1cust224.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:19:59 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:19:38 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 37 Message-ID: <fck6lg$nkv$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81><fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust224.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > It seems there is nothing new here. Without meta-data such as HTTP's > Content-type, an editor has no way to know if a file is in ISO 8859-1, > ISO 8859-2, UTF-8, etc. Yes. The OS/2 HPFS filesystem offers "extended attributes". With W2K and XP I'm apparently limited to "file extension" plus/minus BOM. On a personal note, my OS/2 box crashed three months ago, and that severly limited my online activities. OTOH it forced me to work with W2K, XP, and (relatively) modern tools, and I'm rather annoyed that the UTF-8 = situation is still so bad even with current tools. [W3C validator]=20 >> For text/xml it assumes ASCII (so far that's correct) and ignores >> the encoding in the XML declaration (and that's an oddity). > If it's true, it is a major bug, which should be reported ASAP. On the validator list Olivier convinced me that is actually correct, compare <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.org.w3c.validator/9912> For text/xml without charset RFC 3023 says "MUST assume US ASCII", and XML 1.0 (4.3.3) says that it's a "fatal error" if a document contains octets in conflict with the externally declared charset. In theory the major bug is a Firefox 2.0.0.6 issue, it shouldn't upload *.xml as text/xml without charset. I can't tell why it does not use application/xml for *.xml. But it's not limited to FF2, the Web servers of my pages also use text/xml without charset, and don't allow me to create my own .ht-thingy files to specify what I want. With googlepages it's even odder, sometimes it sends *.xml as some kind of XML, at other times it claims application/octet-stream. So far for the wonders of UTF-8 XML, sigh. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sun Sep 16 17:21:05 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX1Y9-0001oS-7x; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:21:05 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IX1Y8-0001oK-JD for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:21:04 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX1Y8-0001oB-9K for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:21:04 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX1Y4-0004lN-PU for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:21:04 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IX1Y2-0006uQ-HV; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:20:58 -0400 Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:20:58 -0400 To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate Message-ID: <20070916212058.GC20459@mercury.ccil.org> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Cc: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Stephane Bortzmeyer scripsit: > It is certainly a big issue for all text formats where there is no > structure to indicate the encoding but it is not a new issue. XML does > not have this problem because there is a standard way to specify the > encoding in the file itself. True. However, XML has its own problem, namely that people tend to give it a media type of text/xml, and text/xml *means* that the file is in US-ASCII, no matter what the encoding declaration says. If the type is application/xml, then the encoding declaration is believed. -- What asininity could I have uttered John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> that they applaud me thus? http://www.ccil.org/~cowan --Phocion, Greek orator _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 00:06:53 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX7so-0007gx-3C; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:06:50 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IX7sm-0007cX-Jk for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:06:48 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX7sm-0007ZE-5j for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:06:48 -0400 Received: from mta13.mail.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.44] helo=mta13.adelphia.net) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX7sl-00079h-Bt for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:06:48 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta13.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070917040644.BFHZ4108.mta13.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:06:44 -0400 Message-ID: <002001c7f8e0$28fc61e0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IWkiZ-0004t8-2y@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:06:43 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2086112c730e13d5955355df27e3074b Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: > No surprise here, I worry about tools which are not designed or not > configured to work with UTF-8. The hex. NCRs are robuster with > arbitrary tools. Of course you will be able to read the 11-character string "Bokmål" on just about any computer configuration build in the past 20 years. It's pure ASCII. The question is whether the robust hex NCRs are meaningful to consumers of the Registry. What we really have here is not so much a technical argument, but a philosophical argument with technical elements. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but: * The UTF-8 supporters believe it is most important to represent the correct characters of the Registry using a direct encoding, even if not all computers are able to render it, and even if extra work is needed to convert it to some other format. * The hex-NCR supporters believe it is most important to be able to reconstruct the correct characters of the Registry unambiguously, even if they do not display correctly on any computer without being converted. Which side holds greater sway for you probably determines whether you prefer UTF-8 or hex NCRs for the Registry. > Ugh... http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.ltru/8492/raw is what I > sent, QP UTF-8 =C3=A5 for aring http://purl.net/net/ucode/e5 > > It's still okay in the current mbox file of the IETF archive, =C3=A5 > in ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/ltru/current > > In the corresponding Web server document it's shown as à > http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg08509.html > Apparently a bug near the Web interface to the list archive (?) Not a single one of those displayed lowercase a-with-ring as I would expect. I don't dispute that e-mail systems and mail archives have problems displaying UTF-8 correctly, nor that different systems have different problems. We already discussed that from the perspective of sending updates to IANA via e-mail. > But it's very easy to run into obscure bugs with 3rd party tools for a > plain text UTF-8 file without manual intervention. So far we have > identified an IETF list interface, the W3C validator (for UTF-8 XML), > modern browsers like FF2, and some Win editors, where plain text UTF-8 > doesn't work without manual intervention. We agree. I think I view this position as, it's better to have hex NCRs which are never scrutable without intervention than UTF-8 which is sometimes scrutable without intervention, because at least with hex NCRs you know. >> ... I do not see what this has to do the record-jar Registry. > > I don't have these problems with encoding="US-ASCII" based on the > robust 4646 record-jar input. I run into these problems using a > hypothetical 4646bis UTF-8 registry and precisely the same tool (after > s/US-ASCII/UTF-8/ in its XML declaration). Pure ASCII is usable on more systems than any other encoding. Nobody disputes that, and it will probably always be true. > Of course I could convert 4646bis UTF-8 to 4646 hex. NCRs, and then > create encoding="US-ASCII" XML, but that's an odd approach. Something > like http://purl.net/xyzzy/src/ncrify.cmd isn't what you find > everywhere. I would like the chairs to rule on whether we should add "rules and guidelines for converting the record-jar Registry to other formats" to our list of deliverables, before we spend any more time debating this. > The references are as always okay, the input is apparently the > 2007-07-17 639-3 version (I checked some new + retired subtags), The input should have been the 2007-08-01 and 2007-08-14 downloadable files, as stated in Section 7.1. If you found some content that is not consistent with that, please let me know so I can make corrections. > If you have an UTF-8 proto-registry we could compare it with my > gawk -f 4645bis output, and if that's identical your NCR encoder and > my NCR decoder agree. I get an UTF-8 registry with filedate > 2029-09-09, file size 698043, and MD5sum > 43443a34cbb996a3e5a42ed551ef803f I usually use BabelPad or SC UniPad to convert between UTF-8 and hex NCRs. I could write my own tool rather easily, but it's even easier to use editors I already have. I can check to see if my size and MD5 match yours. > No special observation in the prose of your I-D. For the source (the > 639-3 Web site) I'd wish that they show the outcome of the > modification requests (approved or not) directly in their list, not > only in the "more" details per request. That might be helpful. I think for every standard-code-list Web site I've seen, I can think of at least some improvement that would make the list easier to use. The outcome of the modification requests is reflected in the latest data files, though, so strictly speaking this information isn't necessary to review the I-D, which uses the data files and not the requests. > There are quite a lot of modifications, almost 400 in two years, 128 > resolved (= reflected in your I-D). If that continues with a bulk > update once per year the language subtag reviewer will be rather busy > at this time of the year. It looks like it will be twice per year. Every time ISO 639-3 announces a round of changes, and they say this will happen in January 2008, the changes will need to be reflected in the Registry. It is my hope that the rate of change slows down and ISO 639-3 becomes more stable over time, but unfortunately this is the price we have to pay if we want to expand BCP 47 to allow ISO 639-3 code elements. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 02:10:43 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX9og-0000Gg-Gr; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:10:42 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IX9of-0000Ab-F2 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:10:41 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX9oe-0000AS-NV for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:10:40 -0400 Received: from scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.251.195]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX9oc-0000Uc-HN for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:10:40 -0400 Received: from scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scmse1 [133.2.253.16]) by scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id l8H6AUV9022711 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:10:32 +0900 (JST) Received: from (133.2.206.133) by scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp via smtp id 0c80_b14e485e_64e4_11dc_85b4_0014221fa3c9; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:10:30 +0900 X-AuthUser: duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Received: from Tanzawa.it.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.210.1]:57991) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id <S145ED9> for <ltru@lists.ietf.org> from <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:07:10 +0900 Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20070917130940.08aa4250@localhost> X-Sender: duerst@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6J Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:11:32 +0900 To: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate In-Reply-To: <20070916212058.GC20459@mercury.ccil.org> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> <20070916212058.GC20459@mercury.ccil.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org At 06:20 07/09/17, John Cowan wrote: >True. However, XML has its own problem, namely that people tend to >give it a media type of text/xml, and text/xml *means* that the file >is in US-ASCII, Yes, but >>>text/xml; charset=utf-8<<< would mean utf-8. >no matter what the encoding declaration says. If >the type is application/xml, then the encoding declaration is believed. Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 02:10:49 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX9on-0000Jt-MH; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:10:49 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IX9ol-0000Ji-OT for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:10:47 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX9ol-0000JZ-EZ for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:10:47 -0400 Received: from scmailgw1.scop.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.251.194]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IX9oj-0000V2-7z for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:10:47 -0400 Received: from scmse2.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scmse2 [133.2.253.17]) by scmailgw1.scop.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id l8H6Ahma013498 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:10:43 +0900 (JST) Received: from (133.2.206.133) by scmse2.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp via smtp id 5fa8_b8dc7866_64e4_11dc_9441_0014221f2a2d; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:10:42 +0900 X-AuthUser: duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Received: from Tanzawa.it.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.210.1]:57991) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id <S145EDA> for <ltru@lists.ietf.org> from <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:07:31 +0900 Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost> X-Sender: duerst@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6J Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:53:07 +0900 To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate In-Reply-To: <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org At 04:27 07/09/17, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: >It seems there is nothing new here. Without meta-data such as HTTP's >Content-type, an editor has no way to know if a file is in ISO 8859-1, >ISO 8859-2, UTF-8, etc. I think one very specific aspect of our datafile is that it's extremely large and contains almost no actual UTF-8 data, and that data appears rather late. One proposal to improve this situation and potentially help some tools would be to add a few UTF-8 heavy comments at the start of the file. This might look something like File-Date: 2029-09-09 Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< %% I'm not sure whether this is possible with the current file format, or how much backwards-incompatibility we would incur. Because UTF-8 itself is something new, some might argue that the above is good because it provides an upfront warning about the change, and others might argue that it's too much of a change. Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 05:04:59 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXCXC-0005hw-Hw; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:04:50 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXCXB-0005hr-B6 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:04:49 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXCXB-0005hi-1O for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:04:49 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.178]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXCX9-0005MS-R7 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:04:49 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j4so2129757wah for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:04:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=XAzpbW/UKykeHT4wCMlA+L3U8E2O7f08WTIkKhJBWak=; b=A3pOLmS/0Jo/PmIP/M5XTzhe3nytKf+vhpcFzoaFL3wUKthBAnu8kRe7OrJuVf88KOYyXLZCf3kK02W//MqjwFR6fgGrJz00i0HHmAdTGNZ9HghoDm2LBx5zAHkuKP3OF2q1uvv+ouWBu4+tb4BU9qvS4v/tFMP+GZM6WTGYi/4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=JD9W1hbA6x9NjOBQ0J7syWKypbydPoBd0SOD8BpM6mhlcAxTIMCdRSiBDI5CZIib57vsP84cbPpkXGIcUJoOE4cKlSe0svP2Lv5+urU3i8Cbik+2lVYo4jshjuOQhQDNv++TwALiIStrgvzr5wgrY3BmrVi4rdx8RPhVtcmkH+Q= Received: by 10.114.152.17 with SMTP id z17mr426585wad.1190019886974; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:04:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.154.3 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:04:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <41a006820709170204k7967c7a3wa1f63c7029bb94f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:04:46 +0200 From: GerardM <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> To: ltru@lists.ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> <6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost> X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9466e0365fc95844abaf7c3f15a05c7d Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0070887403==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============0070887403== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6359_6827954.1190019886973" ------=_Part_6359_6827954.1190019886973 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Hoi, One issue seems to be if it is good enough when meta data indicates that content is in a particular encoding. I do not understand this as an issue as the work that we do is to allow language information to be part of the meta data of a document. When it is not acceptable that in the meta data it is indicated what encoding is used, is it acceptable to have codes that indicate languages in Meta data? When UTF-8 is indicated, it is UTF-8. When this is not good enough I think we are talking for the talking. Thanks, Gerard ------=_Part_6359_6827954.1190019886973 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Hoi,<br>One issue seems to be if it is good enough when meta data indicates that content is in a particular encoding. I do not understand this as an issue as the work that we do is to allow language information to be part of the meta data of a document. <br><br>When it is not acceptable that in the meta data it is indicated what encoding is used, is it acceptable to have codes that indicate languages in Meta data? When UTF-8 is indicated, it is UTF-8. When this is not good enough I think we are talking for the talking. <br><br>Thanks,<br>    Gerard<br> ------=_Part_6359_6827954.1190019886973-- --===============0070887403== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============0070887403==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 05:16:27 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXCiR-00078o-7Q; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:16:27 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXCiO-00078Z-N2 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:16:25 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXCiO-00078R-DC for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:16:24 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXCiM-0005mA-Jt for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:16:24 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 07F8C1C00ED; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:16:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030251C00E4; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:16:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC7D58ECC8; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:16:21 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:16:21 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> To: GerardM <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070917091621.GA21402@nic.fr> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> <6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost> <41a006820709170204k7967c7a3wa1f63c7029bb94f@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41a006820709170204k7967c7a3wa1f63c7029bb94f@mail.gmail.com> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 11:04:46AM +0200, GerardM <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote a message of 49 lines which said: > When it is not acceptable that in the meta data it is indicated what > encoding is used, is it acceptable to have codes that indicate > languages in Meta data? We are talking about the format of the *registry*, not about the format of the resources that will be tagged with language tags. The registry is not tagged with a language tag. It is plain text and provides no easy way to indicate the encoding in the file itself. The only meta-data currently allowed in the registry is File-Date. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 05:54:07 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXDIs-00070p-Jw; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:54:06 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXDIr-00070i-6Z for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:54:05 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXDIq-00070a-T7 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:54:04 -0400 Received: from rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.150]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXDIp-0006sP-KD for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:54:04 -0400 Received: from [10.76.46.24] (travelling-laptop-24.grenoble.corp.yahoo.com [10.76.46.24]) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l8H9rlMo070027 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:53:49 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=MC9mA7qT1zj2nETGr5gNq0z9QSqQes2MPc3gKuOg6WCvL12T0FLptOyANz3lIA0q Message-ID: <46EE4EAA.8060001@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:53:46 -0700 From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> <6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost> <41a006820709170204k7967c7a3wa1f63c7029bb94f@mail.gmail.com> <20070917091621.GA21402@nic.fr> In-Reply-To: <20070917091621.GA21402@nic.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -14.8 (--------------) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org, GerardM <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org We could follow draft-phillips-record-jar and include an encoding signature in the file: [bom]%%encoding=utf-8 File-Date: 2007-09-17 Comments: Some UTF-8 identifying gunk here, such as the file description using zenkaku Latin characters and/or the BOM as UTF-8. To follow Martin's comment, the only changes we'd have to make would be to permit the Comments field in the File-Date record and inclusion of the encodingSig production in the ABNF. Addison Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 11:04:46AM +0200, > GerardM <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote > a message of 49 lines which said: > >> When it is not acceptable that in the meta data it is indicated what >> encoding is used, is it acceptable to have codes that indicate >> languages in Meta data? > > We are talking about the format of the *registry*, not about the > format of the resources that will be tagged with language tags. > > The registry is not tagged with a language tag. It is plain text and > provides no easy way to indicate the encoding in the file itself. The > only meta-data currently allowed in the registry is File-Date. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 06:55:29 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXEGG-0002Iy-GB; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 06:55:28 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXEGG-0002It-2j for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 06:55:28 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXEGF-0002Hs-Of for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 06:55:27 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXEGE-0000FS-GD for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 06:55:27 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXEG5-0000HL-TI for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:55:17 +0200 Received: from pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.86.170.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:55:17 +0200 Received: from nobody by pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:55:17 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:53:09 +0200 Lines: 32 Message-ID: <fclmed$blv$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org><20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> <6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost> <41a006820709170204k7967c7a3wa1f63c7029bb94f@mail.gmail.com><20070917091621.GA21402@nic.fr> <46EE4EAA.8060001@yahoo-inc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Addison Phillips wrote: > We could follow draft-phillips-record-jar and include an encoding=20 > signature in the file: >=20 > [bom]%%encoding=3Dutf-8 > File-Date: 2007-09-17 > Comments: Some UTF-8 identifying gunk here, such as the file = description > using zenkaku Latin characters and/or the BOM as UTF-8. While I don't like UTF-8 for the registry I think that adding a BOM = helps. Adding %%encoding=3Dutf-8 makes sense if you intend to publish your record-jar I-D as RFC in the foreseeable future.=20 I'm not aware of any tools where adding dummy content with non-ASCII UTF-8 near the begin helps, let alone in addition to a BOM. > To follow Martin's comment, the only changes we'd have to make would > be to permit the Comments field in the File-Date record and inclusion = of=20 > the encodingSig production in the ABNF. The minimal change for UTF-8 would be to introduce a BOM and to get rid of the hex. NCRs. =20 Adding comments would be a major change for say XML converters if they try to preserve these comments. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 09:32:05 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXGhn-0001NZ-VX; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:32:04 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXGhm-0001NN-3E for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:32:02 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXGhl-0001ND-Pa for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:32:01 -0400 Received: from mta11.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.205]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXGhi-0003u1-RT for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:32:01 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta11.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070917133158.NFNX18315.mta11.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:31:58 -0400 Message-ID: <001e01c7f92f$1f316b20$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IXCiR-00078v-D1@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 06:31:57 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465 Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Martin Duerst <duerst at it dot aoyama dot ac dot jp> wrote: > I think one very specific aspect of our datafile is that it's > extremely large and contains almost no actual UTF-8 data, and that > data appears rather late. The first occurrence of a hex NCR in the current Registry, and therefore the first occurrence of a UTF-8 character, is at decimal offset 11,049. This is roughly one-eighth of the way into the 88,259-byte file. I'm not sure how far auto-detection tools typically look for the first non-ASCII character; at least 16 kiB would sound reasonable to me. > One proposal to improve this situation and potentially help some tools > would be to add a few UTF-8 heavy comments at the start of the file. > This might look something like > > File-Date: 2029-09-09 > Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< > Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< > Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< > Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< > Comments: >>>>lots of UTF-8 here<<< > %% This would help only if the problem is late detection of UTF-8, not an inability to grok UTF-8 at all. > I'm not sure whether this is possible with the current file format, It's not; the File-Date line is extraordinary, and we don't currently allow Comments fields to be attached to it. Of course this could be changed. > or how much backwards-incompatibility we would incur. Because UTF-8 > itself is something new, some might argue that the above is good > because it provides an upfront warning about the change, and others > might argue that it's too much of a change. I suppose I could point out that up-front identification of UTF-8 is one of the advantages of using a BOM. I'd better not, because I make myself only slightly less unpopular defending the UTF-8 BOM than I do defending Plane 14 tags. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 13:11:35 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXK8E-0001oC-Lo; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:11:34 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXK8C-0001na-IN for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:11:32 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXK8C-0001nQ-8T for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:11:32 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXK8A-0001G5-II for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:11:32 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXK7l-0006dZ-Af for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:11:05 +0200 Received: from 1cust167.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.10.167]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:11:05 +0200 Received: from nobody by 1cust167.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:11:05 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:10:33 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 91 Message-ID: <fcmceg$12j$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <E1IWkiZ-0004t8-2y@megatron.ietf.org> <002001c7f8e0$28fc61e0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust167.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 386e0819b1192672467565a524848168 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Doug Ewell wrote: =20 > What we really have here is not so much a technical argument, > but a philosophical argument with technical elements. Yes. [obscure aring problem]=20 > Not a single one of those displayed lowercase a-with-ring as I > would expect. The "raw" GMaNe link was supposed to show the raw quoted printable mail as I sent it, =3DC3=3DA5. The normal link for this article is http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.ltru/8492 (without /raw). And the current LTRU archive on the IETF ftp server is an ordinary ASCII mbox file, also with quoted printable =3DC3=3DA5. Any UA or tool supporting MIME would decode the transfer encoding and arrive at the intended UTF-8 encoding of u+00E5. Apparently the Web interface of the IETF archive gets this wrong, it shows à for the =3DC3=3DA5. > We already discussed that from the perspective of sending updates > to IANA via e-mail. Yes, and I'm sure that the subtag reviewer, his appointed record editor, and IANA will get this right. IANA will also manage to configure its Web servers correctly. UTF-8 is no rocket science, at some point in time it will be a kind of new universal charset. [...] > I think I view this position as, it's better to have hex NCRs=20 > which are never scrutable without intervention than UTF-8 which > is sometimes scrutable without intervention, because at least > with hex NCRs you know. +1, that's how I feel about it. It's also clear that a majority prefers UTF-8 (including Michael, although he doesn't post here). [Conversions]=20 > I would like the chairs to rule on whether we should add "rules > and guidelines for converting the record-jar Registry to other > formats" to our list of deliverables, before we spend any more > time debating this. IMO <http://www.langtag.net> covers this already. One point might be relevant in this debate: I'm pretty sure that XML will continue to support hex. NCRs "forever". IMHO we're not obliged to switch to UTF-8 *now* because we'd have to do it anyway *later*. [hex. NCR en- and decoders] >> I get an UTF-8 registry with filedate 2029-09-09, file size=20 >> 698043, and MD5sum 43443a34cbb996a3e5a42ed551ef803f [...] > I can check to see if my size and MD5 match yours. Okay. If you use established encoders (unlike my ad hoc decoder) the output is likely okay, but I'd feel better if we know that my side matches your input. =20 =20 [639-3 pages] > The outcome of the modification requests is reflected in the=20 > latest data files, though, so strictly speaking this information > isn't necessary to review the I-D, which uses the data files=20 > and not the requests. It could help later if an approved modification somehow gets lost on its way from these pages via the review list to the registry. [almost 400 modification requests in two years] =20 > It is my hope that the rate of change slows down and ISO 639-3 > becomes more stable over time +1. But it's already obvious that "stable forever" macrolanguage relations in the form of "extlang + prefix" won't fly, they split, merge, add, and remove sets far too often for this approach. In another article you wrote: | I could point out that up-front identification of UTF-8 is one=20 | of the advantages of using a BOM. I'd better not, because I make | myself only slightly less unpopular defending the UTF-8 BOM than | I do defending Plane 14 tags. For the awk scripts I'll have to figure out how to match it if the BOM is immediately followed by the file-date. If it's on a separate "encoding" line before the file-date line (Addison's proposal) there won't be a problem, I'd just ignore the encoding line assuming UTF-8. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 13:20:09 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXKGX-0003oV-0a; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:20:09 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXKGV-0003oI-A1 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:20:07 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXKGV-0003oA-0K for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:20:07 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXKGT-0001s7-MM for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:20:06 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IXKGS-0008QI-BO; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:20:04 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:20:04 -0400 To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate Message-ID: <20070917172004.GB5645@mercury.ccil.org> References: <E1IWkiZ-0004t8-2y@megatron.ietf.org> <002001c7f8e0$28fc61e0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fcmceg$12j$1@sea.gmane.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <fcmceg$12j$1@sea.gmane.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann scripsit: > +1. But it's already obvious that "stable forever" macrolanguage > relations in the form of "extlang + prefix" won't fly, they split, > merge, add, and remove sets far too often for this approach. Red herring. I'm proposing extlang subtags as a one-time permanent shim for 639-2 to 639-3 bridging and nothing else, in order to make a smooth on-ramp for using the new tags without breaking old searches. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org "Mr. Lane, if you ever wish anything that I can do, all you will have to do will be to send me a telegram asking and it will be done." "Mr. Hearst, if you ever get a telegram from me asking you to do anything, you can put the telegram down as a forgery." _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 14:52:36 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXLhy-0006E8-JV; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:52:36 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXLhx-0006Dq-M5 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:52:33 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXLhx-0006Dg-CF for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:52:33 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXLhv-0005Gu-Ma for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:52:33 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXLYF-00049w-CO for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:42:31 +0200 Received: from 1cust167.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.10.167]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:42:31 +0200 Received: from nobody by 1cust167.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:42:31 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:37:21 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 36 Message-ID: <fcmhh8$oms$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <E1IWkiZ-0004t8-2y@megatron.ietf.org><002001c7f8e0$28fc61e0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81><fcmceg$12j$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070917172004.GB5645@mercury.ccil.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust167.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 39bd8f8cbb76cae18b7e23f7cf6b2b9f Cc: Subject: [Ltru] another extlang concept (was: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate) X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org John Cowan wrote: >> it's already obvious that "stable forever" macrolanguage relations >> in the form of "extlang + prefix" won't fly, they split, merge,=20 >> add, and remove sets far too often for this approach. =20 > Red herring. I'm proposing extlang subtags as a one-time permanent > shim for 639-2 to 639-3 bridging and nothing else, in order to > make a smooth on-ramp for using the new tags without breaking old > searches. I was talking about the almost 400 resolved and pending modification requests wrt the extlang concept in draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-08.txt with up to three extlang subtags behind a macrolanguage subtag, all of this "stable forever" (modulo deprecation). That "old" concept in the current draft won't fly, the macrolanguage sets are far too volatile at the moment. I wasn't talking about your proposal, actuallly I'm not completely sure what your proposal is: Which macrolanguages in addition to ar, zh, and the special sgn case would you adopt for the initial 4645bis registry ? Are later additions to the existing initial sets allowed ? What happens if 639-3 removes a language from one of the existing sets (e.g. ar-xxx becomes xxx, would we deprecate extlang xxx in favour of a new language xxx) ? I think your proposal would allow to replace "up to three" by "at most one" extlang in the 4646bis syntax for a fixed initial set of=20 macrolanguages, is that correct ? Can we enumerate this fixed initial set directly in the syntax ? Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 17 18:06:22 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXOhf-0006zf-9a; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:04:27 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXOhd-0006yz-9h for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:04:25 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXOhd-0006xT-02 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:04:25 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXOhQ-0002dM-RQ for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:04:18 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IXOh4-0006bY-VC; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:03:51 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:03:50 -0400 To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] another extlang concept (was: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate) Message-ID: <20070917220350.GB21052@mercury.ccil.org> References: <20070917172004.GB5645@mercury.ccil.org> <fcmhh8$oms$1@sea.gmane.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <fcmhh8$oms$1@sea.gmane.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann scripsit: > Which macrolanguages in addition to ar, zh, and the special sgn case > would you adopt for the initial 4645bis registry ? All of them present in 639-3 as of Date C. > Are later additions to the existing initial sets allowed ? No (with the possible exception of sgn). > What happens if 639-3 removes a language from one of the existing > sets (e.g. ar-xxx becomes xxx, would we deprecate extlang xxx in > favour of a new language xxx) ? No. > I think your proposal would allow to replace "up to three" by "at > most one" extlang in the 4646bis syntax for a fixed initial set of > macrolanguages, is that correct ? Yes. > Can we enumerate this fixed initial set directly in the syntax ? In principle, but that would make the syntax unreadable. This is my current position, which differs from earlier positions of mine. Gadshill: Stand! Falstaff: So I do, against my will. --Shakespeare, Henry IV Part I -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org http://ccil.org/~cowan Objective consideration of contemporary phenomena compel the conclusion that optimum or inadequate performance in the trend of competitive activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account. --Ecclesiastes 9:11, Orwell/Brown version _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 18 08:11:41 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXbun-0006Bl-W7; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 08:10:53 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXbum-00067Y-NE for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 08:10:52 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXbum-0005q2-BJ for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 08:10:52 -0400 Received: from rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.150]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXbuY-0005Qp-7Z for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 08:10:44 -0400 Received: from [10.76.46.24] (travelling-laptop-24.grenoble.corp.yahoo.com [10.76.46.24]) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l8IC9f35071039 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:09:43 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rF3u2KQU17p34oeymXOAONveXjNE3nrjuRMKNcHpxFROGf3FpaZZa8cZ/EJK+eGq Message-ID: <46EFC004.8050802@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:09:40 -0700 From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org><20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> <6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost> <41a006820709170204k7967c7a3wa1f63c7029bb94f@mail.gmail.com><20070917091621.GA21402@nic.fr> <46EE4EAA.8060001@yahoo-inc.com> <fclmed$blv$1@sea.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <fclmed$blv$1@sea.gmane.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -14.8 (--------------) X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann wrote: > >> We could follow draft-phillips-record-jar and include an encoding >> signature in the file: >> >> [bom]%%encoding=utf-8 >> File-Date: 2007-09-17 >> Comments: Some UTF-8 identifying gunk here, such as the file description >> using zenkaku Latin characters and/or the BOM as UTF-8. > > While I don't like UTF-8 for the registry I think that adding a BOM helps. > > Adding %%encoding=utf-8 makes sense if you intend to publish your > record-jar I-D as RFC in the foreseeable future. I intend to wrap it up as quickly as possible. Since the status will be Informational, I don't foresee vast delays. I note that having an "obvious" encoding declaration on the very first line of the file might help those who forgot about encodings when they opened the file. > > I'm not aware of any tools where adding dummy content with non-ASCII > UTF-8 near the begin helps, let alone in addition to a BOM. Browsers look at the first few K of the file when doing auto-detection, although that is usually for HTML rather than text/plain. > >> To follow Martin's comment, the only changes we'd have to make would >> be to permit the Comments field in the File-Date record and inclusion of >> the encodingSig production in the ABNF. > > The minimal change for UTF-8 would be to introduce a BOM and to get rid > of the hex. NCRs. > > Adding comments would be a major change for say XML converters if > they try to preserve these comments. BOM is much more effective, albeit slightly weird for a UTF-8 file. At least Notepad would read the file as UTF-8, though. Less weird than putting random UTF-8 gunk near the top of the file "just to have some UTF-8 there". Addison -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 18 23:27:04 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqD3-00089h-Ul; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:42 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqD2-00088h-Io for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:40 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqD2-00087e-8i for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:40 -0400 Received: from mta13.mail.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.44] helo=mta13.adelphia.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqCu-0004OF-3Y for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:38 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta13.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070919032603.UDBN4108.mta13.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:03 -0400 Message-ID: <005301c7fa6c$cec509a0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IXfV2-0005Ki-Cc@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:26:02 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 82c9bddb247d9ba4471160a9a865a5f3 Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: > [Conversions] >> I would like the chairs to rule on whether we should add "rules and >> guidelines for converting the record-jar Registry to other formats" >> to our list of deliverables, before we spend any more time debating >> this. > > IMO <http://www.langtag.net> covers this already. That was what I thought too, and in that case I'd prefer to spend less WG time focusing on XML and how easy or hard it is to convert the Registry to XML. We have settled on record-jar. > One point might be relevant in this debate: I'm pretty sure that XML > will continue to support hex. NCRs "forever". IMHO we're not obliged > to switch to UTF-8 *now* because we'd have to do it anyway *later*. I don't see any evidence that the official Registry will inevitably be converted to XML. If we were so sure of that, we probably would have done it now, considering all the other scope creep that has gone on. There is also no guarantee that there will be a "later," i.e. an LTRU 3.0. Many people don't seem to feel that collection codes are particularly valuable in tags, so it's not completely obvious that we'll do another revision to incorporate ISO 639-5. And I know there were some who disliked the additional precision that 639-6 codes are expected to bring. > [639-3 pages] >> The outcome of the modification requests is reflected in the latest >> data files, though, so strictly speaking this information isn't >> necessary to review the I-D, which uses the data files and not the >> requests. > > It could help later if an approved modification somehow gets lost on > its way from these pages via the review list to the registry. Actually the bits were dropped somewhere else: an approved modification, or part of one, got lost on its way to the ISO 639-3 download files, which I picked up faithfully. I onlFrom ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 18 23:27:04 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqD3-00089h-Ul; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:42 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqD2-00088h-Io for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:40 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqD2-00087e-8i for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:40 -0400 Received: from mta13.mail.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.44] helo=mta13.adelphia.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqCu-0004OF-3Y for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:38 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta13.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070919032603.UDBN4108.mta13.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:26:03 -0400 Message-ID: <005301c7fa6c$cec509a0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IXfV2-0005Ki-Cc@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:26:02 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 82c9bddb247d9ba4471160a9a865a5f3 Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: > [Conversions] >> I would like the chairs to rule on whether we should add "rules and >> guidelines for converting the record-jar Registry to other formats" >> to our list of deliverables, before we spend any more time debating >> this. > > IMO <http://www.langtag.net> covers this already. That was what I thought too, and in that case I'd prefer to spend less WG time focusing on XML and how easy or hard it is to convert the Registry to XML. We have settled on record-jar. > One point might be relevant in this debate: I'm pretty sure that XML > will continue to support hex. NCRs "forever". IMHO we're not obliged > to switch to UTF-8 *now* because we'd have to do it anyway *later*. I don't see any evidence that the official Registry will inevitably be converted to XML. If we were so sure of that, we probably would have done it now, considering all the other scope creep that has gone on. There is also no guarantee that there will be a "later," i.e. an LTRU 3.0. Many people don't seem to feel that collection codes are particularly valuable in tags, so it's not completely obvious that we'll do another revision to incorporate ISO 639-5. And I know there were some who disliked the additional precision that 639-6 codes are expected to bring. > [639-3 pages] >> The outcome of the modification requests is reflected in the latest >> data files, though, so strictly speaking this information isn't >> necessary to review the I-D, which uses the data files and not the >> requests. > > It could help later if an approved modification somehow gets lost on > its way from these pages via the review list to the registry. Actually the bits were dropped somewhere else: an approved modification, or part of one, got lost on its way to the ISO 639-3 download files, which I picked up faithfully. I only noticed the discrepancy because I happened to be browsing through the modification list. > But it's already obvious that "stable forever" macrolanguage relations > in the form of "extlang + prefix" won't fly, they split, merge, add, > and remove sets far too often for this approach. I don't think anything's obvious any more about macrolanguages and extlangs, at least as far as LTRU is concerned. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 18 23:27:04 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqBq-00076t-FF; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:25:26 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqBp-00076f-5j for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:25:25 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqBo-000733-Nt for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:25:24 -0400 Received: from scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.251.195]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqBc-0004Mf-7V for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:25:24 -0400 Received: from scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scmse1 [133.2.253.16]) by scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id l8J3OBtT013006 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:24:15 +0900 (JST) Received: from (133.2.206.133) by scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp via smtp id 4d4c_ca409890_665f_11dc_8252_0014221fa3c9; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:24:10 +0900 X-AuthUser: duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Received: from Tanzawa.it.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.210.1]:36148) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id <S1493AE> for <ltru@lists.ietf.org> from <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:21:02 +0900 Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20070919112919.048c4c70@localhost> X-Sender: duerst@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6J Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:37:30 +0900 To: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com>, Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate In-Reply-To: <46EFC004.8050802@yahoo-inc.com> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> <6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost> <41a006820709170204k7967c7a3wa1f63c7029bb94f@mail.gmail.com> <20070917091621.GA21402@nic.fr> <46EE4EAA.8060001@yahoo-inc.com> <fclmed$blv$1@sea.gmane.org> <46EFC004.8050802@yahoo-inc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 02ec665d00de228c50c93ed6b5e4fc1a Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org At 21:09 07/09/18, Addison Phillips wrote: >Frank Ellermann wrote: >> >>> We could follow draft-phillips-record-jar and include an encoding signature in the file: >>> >>> [bom]%%encoding=utf-8 >>> File-Date: 2007-09-17 >>> Comments: Some UTF-8 identifying gunk here, such as the file description >>> using zenkaku Latin characters and/or the BOM as UTF-8. >> While I don't like UTF-8 for the registry I think that adding a BOM helps. >> Adding %%encoy noticed the discrepancy because I happened to be browsing through the modification list. > But it's already obvious that "stable forever" macrolanguage relations > in the form of "extlang + prefix" won't fly, they split, merge, add, > and remove sets far too often for this approach. I don't think anything's obvious any more about macrolanguages and extlangs, at least as far as LTRU is concerned. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 18 23:27:04 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqBq-00076t-FF; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:25:26 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqBp-00076f-5j for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:25:25 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqBo-000733-Nt for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:25:24 -0400 Received: from scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.251.195]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqBc-0004Mf-7V for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:25:24 -0400 Received: from scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scmse1 [133.2.253.16]) by scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id l8J3OBtT013006 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:24:15 +0900 (JST) Received: from (133.2.206.133) by scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp via smtp id 4d4c_ca409890_665f_11dc_8252_0014221fa3c9; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:24:10 +0900 X-AuthUser: duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Received: from Tanzawa.it.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.210.1]:36148) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id <S1493AE> for <ltru@lists.ietf.org> from <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:21:02 +0900 Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20070919112919.048c4c70@localhost> X-Sender: duerst@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6J Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:37:30 +0900 To: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com>, Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate In-Reply-To: <46EFC004.8050802@yahoo-inc.com> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org> <6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost> <41a006820709170204k7967c7a3wa1f63c7029bb94f@mail.gmail.com> <20070917091621.GA21402@nic.fr> <46EE4EAA.8060001@yahoo-inc.com> <fclmed$blv$1@sea.gmane.org> <46EFC004.8050802@yahoo-inc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 02ec665d00de228c50c93ed6b5e4fc1a Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org At 21:09 07/09/18, Addison Phillips wrote: >Frank Ellermann wrote: >> >>> We could follow draft-phillips-record-jar and include an encoding signature in the file: >>> >>> [bom]%%encoding=utf-8 >>> File-Date: 2007-09-17 >>> Comments: Some UTF-8 identifying gunk here, such as the file description >>> using zenkaku Latin characters and/or the BOM as UTF-8. >> While I don't like UTF-8 for the registry I think that adding a BOM helps. >> Adding %%encoding=utf-8 makes sense if you intend to publish your >> record-jar I-D as RFC in the foreseeable future. > >I intend to wrap it up as quickly as possible. Since the status will be Informational, I don't foresee vast delays. > >I note that having an "obvious" encoding declaration on the very first line of the file might help those who forgot about encodings when they opened the file. Yes indeed. One problem with it is that some people might think that the registry can come in versions with different encodings. I wouldn't want to give them such an impression. >> I'm not aware of any tools where adding dummy content with non-ASCII >> UTF-8 near the begin helps, let alone in addition to a BOM. > >Browsers look at the first few K of the file when doing auto-detection, although that is usually for HTML rather than text/plain. Many Japanese text editors do. But this has been the case historically, even before UTF-8. >>> To follow Martin's comment, the only changes we'd have to make would >>> be to permit the Comments field in the File-Date record and inclusion of the encodingSig production in the ABNF. >> The minimal change for UTF-8 would be to introduce a BOM and to get rid >> of the hex. NCRs. >> Adding comments would be a major change for say XML converters if >> they try to preserve these comments. > >BOM is much more effective, albeit slightly weird for a UTF-8 file. At least Notepad would read the file as UTF-8, though. Less weird than putting random UTF-8 gunk near the top of the file "just to have some UTF-8 there". Random gunk is definitely a bad idea. It would have to be part of the official syntax. A BOM is problematic because it inherently changes parsing. Rather than just parse US-ASCII and be 8-bit-clean for data values, some very special parsing has to be done. My overall personal preferences would probably be as follows: 1) Go for UTF-8, to help end users. 2) Okay to add some comment fields at the start, but I don't think they are really necessary 3) Marginally okay to add some 'encoding-declaration'-like field at the top. 4) Against the BOM, but okay if everybody else really wants it. Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru ding=utf-8 makes sense if you intend to publish your >> record-jar I-D as RFC in the foreseeable future. > >I intend to wrap it up as quickly as possible. Since the status will be Informational, I don't foresee vast delays. > >I note that having an "obvious" encoding declaration on the very first line of the file might help those who forgot about encodings when they opened the file. Yes indeed. One problem with it is that some people might think that the registry can come in versions with different encodings. I wouldn't want to give them such an impression. >> I'm not aware of any tools where adding dummy content with non-ASCII >> UTF-8 near the begin helps, let alone in addition to a BOM. > >Browsers look at the first few K of the file when doing auto-detection, although that is usually for HTML rather than text/plain. Many Japanese text editors do. But this has been the case historically, even before UTF-8. >>> To follow Martin's comment, the only changes we'd have to make would >>> be to permit the Comments field in the File-Date record and inclusion of the encodingSig production in the ABNF. >> The minimal change for UTF-8 would be to introduce a BOM and to get rid >> of the hex. NCRs. >> Adding comments would be a major change for say XML converters if >> they try to preserve these comments. > >BOM is much more effective, albeit slightly weird for a UTF-8 file. At least Notepad would read the file as UTF-8, though. Less weird than putting random UTF-8 gunk near the top of the file "just to have some UTF-8 there". Random gunk is definitely a bad idea. It would have to be part of the official syntax. A BOM is problematic because it inherently changes parsing. Rather than just parse US-ASCII and be 8-bit-clean for data values, some very special parsing has to be done. My overall personal preferences would probably be as follows: 1) Go for UTF-8, to help end users. 2) Okay to add some comment fields at the start, but I don't think they are really necessary 3) Marginally okay to add some 'encoding-declaration'-like field at the top. 4) Against the BOM, but okay if everybody else really wants it. Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 18 23:40:55 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqQW-0002ko-J3; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:40:36 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqQV-0002ix-3b for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:40:35 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqQU-0002ip-Pb for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:40:34 -0400 Received: from mta11.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.205]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXqQU-0001Xx-Fw for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:40:34 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta11.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070919034034.MMIT28177.mta11.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:40:34 -0400 Message-ID: <005701c7fa6e$d57f6130$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IXfV2-0005Ki-Cc@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:40:33 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Addison Phillips <addison at yahoo dash inc dot com> wrote: > BOM is much more effective, albeit slightly weird for a UTF-8 file. I still don't understand why a U+FEFF signature in a UTF-8 file is considered so "weird." (Notice I did not use the words "byte order mark.") The role of U+FEFF as a signature to identify the encoding was introduced as early as 1992 (TUS 1.0, Volume 2, p. 7), before there was a UTF-8. TUS 5.0 describes the appropriate use of UTF-8 signatures in sections 2.13 and 16.8 (although Section 3.10 provides a mixed signal: "neither required nor recommended"), and RFC 3629 (STD 63) also describes conditions where the three-byte signature might be appropriate (Second 6, third bullet point). -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 02:58:29 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXtVr-0000wa-BM; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 02:58:19 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXtVp-0000uv-7L for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 02:58:17 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXtVk-0000qJ-24 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 02:58:12 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXtVY-0000YV-Pr for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 02:58:06 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXtUy-0006J4-6I for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:57:24 +0200 Received: from pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.86.170.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:57:24 +0200 Received: from nobody by pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:57:24 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:55:16 +0200 Lines: 16 Message-ID: <fcqh8b$sf0$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <020b01c7f6ee$fd68c660$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81><fch4de$fgd$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070916192717.GA30265@sources.org><6.0.0.20.2.20070917131345.08aa7170@localhost><41a006820709170204k7967c7a3wa1f63c7029bb94f@mail.gmail.com><20070917091621.GA21402@nic.fr> <46EE4EAA.8060001@yahoo-inc.com><fclmed$blv$1@sea.gmane.org> <46EFC004.8050802@yahoo-inc.com> <6.0.0.20.2.20070919112919.048c4c70@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Martin Duerst wrote: > A BOM is problematic because it inherently changes parsing. > Rather than just parse US-ASCII and be 8-bit-clean for data > values, some very special parsing has to be done. >From my POV an initial line [BOM]encoding=3Dutf-8 would work, I'd ignore it triggering UTF-8 mode, where an XML converter has to escape "&" in addition to "<" and ">". A BOM also helps with some Windows tools. Without this line the same converter could assume 4646 "NCR-mode" keeping all "&" as is and using encoding=3D"US-ASCII" in the XML declaration. Frank=20 _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 05:58:27 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXwJr-0007HN-A5; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:07 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXwJp-0007HD-UK for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:05 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXwJp-0007H4-I9 for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:05 -0400 Received: from smtp1.wsfo.org ([208.145.81.51]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXwJk-0005NS-0p for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:05 -0400 Received: from mail.link77.net (mail.link77.net [172.22.0.125]) by smtp1.wsfo.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l8J9vW2Z006129 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:57:32 -0400 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 172.22.0.51 X-Scanned-By: RAE MPP/Clamd http://raeinternet.com/mpp X-Scanned-By: This message was scanned by MPP Free Edition (www.messagepartners.com)! Received: from [89.243.237.143] (account martin_hosken@sil.org HELO [192.168.0.4]) by mail.link77.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.12) with ESMTPSA id 157403686; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:57:31 -0400 Message-ID: <46F0F263.50005@sil.org> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:56:51 +0100 From: Martin Hosken <martin_hosken@sil.org> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (X11/20070824) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate References: <E1IXfV2-0005Ki-Cc@megatron.ietf.org> <005701c7fa6e$d57f6130$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> In-Reply-To: <005701c7fa6e$d57f6130$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -3.8 (---) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org> X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Dear Doug, > >> BOM is much more effective, albeit slightly weird for a UTF-8 file. > > I still don't understand why a U+FEFF signature in a UTF-8 file is > considered so "weird." (Notice I did not use the words "byte order > mark.") Because to a non-Unicode 8-bit or ASCII based process, U+FEFF in UTF8 is just so much upper ASCII non-whitespace line noise just at the start of the file. So the file starts with junk and the process will fall over. Yours, Martin _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 06:05:31 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXwQa-0008Kf-2q; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 06:05:04 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXwQX-0008KN-RD for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 06:05:01 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXwQX-0008KD-EO for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 06:05:01 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXwQX-0003SS-29 for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 06:05:01 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 7EC4D1C0135; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:05:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79FE61C0134; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:05:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7450958ECCC; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:05:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:05:00 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> To: Martin Hosken <martin_hosken@sil.org> Message-ID: <20070919100500.GA28586@nic.fr> References: <E1IXfV2-0005Ki-Cc@megatron.ietf.org> <005701c7fa6e$d57f6130$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <46F0F263.50005@sil.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46F0F263.50005@sil.org> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9466e0365fc95844abaf7c3f15a05c7d Cc: Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com>, LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org> Subject: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 10:56:51AM +0100, Martin Hosken <martin_hosken@sil.org> wrote a message of 22 lines which said: > Because to a non-Unicode 8-bit or ASCII based process, U+FEFF in > UTF8 is just so much upper ASCII non-whitespace line noise just at > the start of the file. So the file starts with junk and the process > will fall over. +1 Just say no to BOM in UTF-8 files http://unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html#29 Q: Can a UTF-8 data stream contain the BOM character (in UTF-8 form)? If yes, then can I still assume the remaining UTF-8 bytes are in big-endian order? A: Yes, UTF-8 can contain a BOM. However, it makes no difference as to the endianness of the byte stream. UTF-8 always has the same byte order. An initial BOM is only used as a signature -- an indication that an otherwise unmarked text file is in UTF-8. Note that some recipients of UTF-8 encoded data do not expect a BOM. Where UTF-8 is used transparently in 8-bit environments, the use of a BOM will interfere with any protocol or file format that expects specific ASCII characters at the beginning, such as the use of "#!" of at the beginning of Unix shell scripts. [AF] & [MD] _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 10:06:51 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY0Bl-0001lf-Fj; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:06:01 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IY0Bk-0001l9-8v for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:06:00 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY0Bj-0001i8-Uu for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:05:59 -0400 Received: from mta9.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.199]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY0Bg-0000sl-J8 for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:05:56 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta9.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070919140555.NUSN16948.mta9.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:05:55 -0400 Message-ID: <001901c7fac6$329ce480$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IXfV2-0005Ki-Cc@megatron.ietf.org> <005701c7fa6e$d57f6130$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <46F0F263.50005@sil.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 07:05:54 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Martin Hosken <martin underscore hosken at sil dot org> wrote: >> I still don't understand why a U+FEFF signature in a UTF-8 file is >> considered so "weird." (Notice I did not use the words "byte order >> mark.") > > Because to a non-Unicode 8-bit or ASCII based process, U+FEFF in UTF8 > is just so much upper ASCII non-whitespace line noise just at the > start of the file. So the file starts with junk and the process will > fall over. That's fine for UTF-8 files that need to be understood by non-UTF-8-aware programs. I thought the problem here was UTF-8-aware programs that weren't being adequately informed that the file was UTF-8 so they could switch into the right mode. Non-UTF-8-aware programs are going to interpret high-bit characters in the Registry as junk anyway. I agree with Addison: a gratuitous Comments field with one or more gratuitous non-ASCII characters is sillier than using U+FEFF. If our goal is to stay 100% compatible with ASCII-only readers, and I know some people think that should be our goal, then the solution is to stick with hex NCRs. But then we will continue to endure the complaints of other people that strings like Birlәşdirilmiş are not readable. And I am categorically opposed to filling the Registry with "transcriptions" from accented Latin to unaccented Latin as a kludge to get around our character-encoding problems. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 10:28:52 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY0Xh-0006Si-TU; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:28:41 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IY0Xg-0006SX-PQ for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:28:40 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY0Xg-0006SO-F0 for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:28:40 -0400 Received: from rsmtp1.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.149]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY0Xa-0003Ex-6B for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:28:40 -0400 Received: from [10.76.40.214] (UNKNOWN-10-76-40-214.yahoo.com [10.76.40.214] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp1.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l8JES9Mh054545 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 19 Sep 2007 07:28:10 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ck2moON9mhusqRJJK6DaeRJ2NHAZdYCo39h81k+bpv5vlpAxZTwLItgTg6vPOsLQ Message-ID: <46F131F8.20702@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 07:28:08 -0700 From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Wrapping up the UTF-8 debate References: <E1IXfV2-0005Ki-Cc@megatron.ietf.org> <005701c7fa6e$d57f6130$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <46F0F263.50005@sil.org> <001901c7fac6$329ce480$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> In-Reply-To: <001901c7fac6$329ce480$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -14.8 (--------------) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org> X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Martin H wrote: > >>> I still don't understand why a U+FEFF signature in a UTF-8 file is >>> considered so "weird." (Notice I did not use the words "byte order >>> mark.") >> >> Because to a non-Unicode 8-bit or ASCII based process, U+FEFF in UTF8 >> is just so much upper ASCII non-whitespace line noise just at the >> start of the file. So the file starts with junk and the process will >> fall over. Not very many well-written programs "fall over" when they see non-ASCII byte sequences in a file. They might display them as mojibake garbage, but then that also applies to any non-ASCII that appears in the file. However, having the BOM appear on the same line as the start of the File-Date field in the first record *would* represent a problem, since a naive processor might well consider the sequence 0xEF.BB.BF followed by "File-Date" not to match the string "File-Date". Hence, my suggestion that we include it on a line announcing the encoding in plain text. Doug responded to Martin (in part) with: > > If our goal is to stay 100% compatible with ASCII-only readers, and I > know some people think that should be our goal, then the solution is to > stick with hex NCRs. But then we will continue to endure the complaints > of other people that strings like Birlәşdirilmiş are > not readable. And I am categorically opposed to filling the Registry > with "transcriptions" from accented Latin to unaccented Latin as a > kludge to get around our character-encoding problems. > Our goal at the moment is to make a plain-text UTF-8 encoded file. The question is: do we announce the encoding or just rely on having users RTFRFC (read the fine RFC)? Addison -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 11:57:39 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY1v7-0005QR-IQ; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:56:57 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IY1v6-0005QI-VQ for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:56:56 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY1v6-0005QA-LI for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:56:56 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.189]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY1uy-0005fu-Cw for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:56:56 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k20so221872rvb for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:56:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=AzzsPoQ29nPgS21M0V1MnzHQ4yCMxajsnd08ZZWxZTs=; b=Cp3a2gNar0ssNCNdSOb6uzh0aiWYOMs41gGFI0scJAD9e1DpeRi2ewOu8YxTL3X7o9uqX+esPzFaoQ/52KPwKhqngfYSobYFms8G21z8htUC8KFQHGG4bWTd969mv3fcmwE+Nv3G6qq69RbWzdMNgkjslg/Yv0SmJsS/HScSv84= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=h7zJyprBj1vlGXw8nQYuaU3iFIVwvTl57F1X8mKC2Cwjva7rdWRqQOrp5HIvG4aa0q7UXTMutU1JWi5QzsJFMd24rG2VUg9xBSQYxNSBaZdR76xg0rwHa3rOkGNfgcbqeGFOxUSSJEoGqDmUcILEdIqEOVhQgjAsTnnTBY1/L/0= Received: by 10.114.52.1 with SMTP id z1mr859076waz.1190217374902; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:56:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.192.9 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:56:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709190856v156a34d5vff6f2430b18139ca@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:56:14 -0700 From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> To: "Peter Constable" <petercon@microsoft.com> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? In-Reply-To: <DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561AC0E353C@NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> <30b660a20709151056o7ccdb949g117363f469ee37b2@mail.gmail.com> <DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579561AC0E353C@NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: de60770f4de9b72c X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a0534e6179a1e260079328e8b03c7901 Cc: "ltru@lists.ietf.org" <ltru@lists.ietf.org> X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1672580647==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============1672580647== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_25122_23868697.1190217374860" ------=_Part_25122_23868697.1190217374860 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Right. I don't think we can hope to find a single meeting time that works for everyone, so I suggested that we hold one meeting on the 24th, and plan for a followup meeting the next week, where you can attend. Mark On 9/15/07, Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com> wrote: > > I do not expect to be able to participate in a meeting until on or after > Oct. 1. > > > > > > Peter > > > > *From:* Mark Davis [mailto:mark.davis@icu-project.org] > *Sent:* Sunday, September 16, 2007 1:57 AM > *To:* Frank Ellermann > *Cc:* ltru@lists.ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? > > > > Sounds great. We should go ahead and schedule another meeting the next > week -- in case we need it, and also so that we can pull in Peter, if he > can't make the first one.. > > > > Mark > > > > On 9/15/07, *Frank Ellermann* <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote: > > Randy Presuhn wrote: > > >> From: "Mark Davis" < mark.davis@icu-project.org> > [...] > >> How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific > Time. > >> > http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 > > > Any of those would work for me, but Wednesday would be best > > That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for > LTRU is apparently working, xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org > > The log would be available below > http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/ > > Frank > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > > > > > -- > Mark > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > > -- Mark ------=_Part_25122_23868697.1190217374860 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Right. I don't think we can hope to find a single meeting time that works for everyone, so I suggested that we hold one meeting on the 24th, and plan for a followup meeting the next week, where you can attend.<br><br>Mark <br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/15/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Peter Constable</b> <<a href="mailto:petercon@microsoft.com">petercon@microsoft.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US"> <div> <p><span style="font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">I do not expect to be able to participate in a meeting until on or after Oct. 1.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Peter</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> </span></p> <div style="border-style: solid none none; border-color: rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt medium medium; padding: 3pt 0in 0in;"> <p><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">From:</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> Mark Davis [mailto:<a href="mailto:mark.davis@icu-project.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">mark.davis@icu-project.org</a>] <br> <b>Sent:</b> Sunday, September 16, 2007 1:57 AM<br> <b>To:</b> Frank Ellermann<br> <b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:ltru@lists.ietf.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">ltru@lists.ietf.org</a><br> <b>Subject:</b> Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session?</span></p> </div><div><span class="e" id="q_1150beb131b6fa95_1"> <p> </p> <div> <p>Sounds great. We should go ahead and schedule another meeting the next week -- in case we need it, and also so that we can pull in Peter, if he can't make the first one..</p> </div> <div> <p> </p> </div> <div> <p>Mark<br> <br>  </p> </div> <div> <p><span>On 9/15/07, <b>Frank Ellermann</b> <<a href="mailto:nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de</a>> wrote:</span> </p> <p>Randy Presuhn wrote:<br> <br> >> From: "Mark Davis" <<a href="mailto:mark.davis@icu-project.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> mark.davis@icu-project.org</a>><br> [...]<br> >> How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific Time.<br> >> <a href="http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 </a><br> <br> > Any of those would work for me, but Wednesday would be best<br> <br> That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for <br> LTRU is apparently working, <a href="mailto:xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org</a><br> <br> The log would be available below<br> <a href="http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/ </a><br> <br> Frank<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> _______________________________________________<br> Ltru mailing list<br> <a href="mailto:Ltru@ietf.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">Ltru@ietf.org</a><br> <a href="https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru </a></p> </div> <p><br> <br clear="all"> <br> -- <br> Mark </p> </span></div></div> </div> <br>_______________________________________________<br>Ltru mailing list<br><a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:Ltru@ietf.org">Ltru@ietf.org</a><br><a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru" target="_blank"> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru</a><br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Mark ------=_Part_25122_23868697.1190217374860-- --===============1672580647== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============1672580647==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 12:01:02 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY1yu-0007Xp-BY; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:00:52 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IY1yt-0007Ww-64 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:00:51 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY1ys-0007Wo-RG for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:00:50 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.177]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY1yk-0005lT-Ti for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:00:50 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j4so316722wah for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:00:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=noPwvz/6N4r6Gtt/0kLw36OtHbWRcI1/G9I38ht31vU=; b=paQd1jETnrVWR+q8OJcr/EEEl20GLRH6/ui+YfmN5/4HhbfQD2avEzJNyHCrOeail+v+XcYwxMUrkuf7PiYYLO+HNIYhI81c8QB9wsXVGubVDr6arn83/Yx6BIHrZtdkPDDHYEpBbRIwY6rJ9iZQuag5BzfIOyn8XSpj+gfdUTg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=la6BfTlkLf/CsXpwsVroCB3Wp+JFcDFz5EnmkdpyrktNO+VCfbarfcika2hyVp6EJ1d0R6wd57okprxZlDtOdqj1Dm6IF29yiSW7XG4ay5qinQjO6/GUyABKn3tgCfSJYewul+5mwjAbuLweP42JncK282ae+Vn7XnBnUPIyyhg= Received: by 10.114.60.19 with SMTP id i19mr859584waa.1190217632067; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:00:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.192.9 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709190900r8cad5edxd3f21dbd6c61ad0f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:00:28 -0700 From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> To: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? In-Reply-To: <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 67871c02a3f60e76 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e8a67952aa972b528dd04570d58ad8fe Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0015439170==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============0015439170== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_25152_25814651.1190217632031" ------=_Part_25152_25814651.1190217632031 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Just to confirm with everyone; that we are planning for a telephone meeting at 16:00 UTC on Wednesday. Martin, Addison, Randy: can one of you set up a call-in line? Mark On 9/15/07, Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote: > > Randy Presuhn wrote: > > >> From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> > [...] > >> How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific > Time. > >> > http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 > > > Any of those would work for me, but Wednesday would be best > > That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for > LTRU is apparently working, xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org > > The log would be available below > http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/ > > Frank > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > -- Mark ------=_Part_25152_25814651.1190217632031 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Just to confirm with everyone; that we are planning for a telephone meeting at 16:00 UTC on Wednesday. <br><br>Martin, Addison, Randy: can one of you set up a call-in line?<br><br>Mark<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote"> On 9/15/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Frank Ellermann</b> <<a href="mailto:nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de">nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Randy Presuhn wrote:<br><br>>> From: "Mark Davis" <<a href="mailto:mark.davis@icu-project.org">mark.davis@icu-project.org</a>><br>[...]<br>>> How about Wed, Thu, or Fri of that week, at 8:00 or 9:00 am Pacific Time. <br>>> <a href="http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224">http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 </a><br><br>> Any of those would work for me, but Wednesday would be best<br><br>That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for<br>LTRU is apparently working, <a href="mailto:xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org"> xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org</a><br><br>The log would be available below<br><a href="http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/">http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/</a><br><br>Frank<br><br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________ <br>Ltru mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ltru@ietf.org">Ltru@ietf.org</a><br><a href="https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru">https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"> <br>-- <br>Mark ------=_Part_25152_25814651.1190217632031-- --===============0015439170== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============0015439170==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 12:49:26 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY2jX-0004pL-KQ; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:49:03 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IY2jW-0004op-Rc for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:49:02 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY2jW-0004ob-HR for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:49:02 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY2jQ-000766-BN for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:49:02 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IY2j9-0005dS-2Z; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:48:39 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:48:39 -0400 To: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? Message-ID: <20070919164839.GF26549@mercury.ccil.org> References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> <30b660a20709190900r8cad5edxd3f21dbd6c61ad0f@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709190900r8cad5edxd3f21dbd6c61ad0f@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d17f825e43c9aed4fd65b7edddddec89 Cc: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mark Davis scripsit: > Just to confirm with everyone; that we are planning for a telephone meeting > at 16:00 UTC on Wednesday. One week from today? -- Only do what only you can do. John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> --Edsger W. Dijkstra's advice to a student in search of a thesis _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 13:24:59 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY3Hz-0001DQ-QD; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:24:39 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IY3Hz-0001DL-98 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:24:39 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY3Hy-0001DD-VY for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:24:38 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.181]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY3Hs-00089X-KJ for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:24:38 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j4so345085wah for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:24:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=rvm3oKLFFtNzKuY8PsdPlnoQoTDfOrvb/ImevNiEqME=; b=UmQ/JI8724K095hiEK4Ejc5PmMJ2ZIJExH/QS1hE1V/rBfddYMqJkDtaKFNQQ6MUnxNhiP8GBiWhhSX/gYKQPOQo+0dIpFB5a8dK3NN9ez/J/u5GWiEKXKQnqHafOLUPnpqQFZkxMw3lpBMSygt4anc6ib2OLBZ0NBXpZ4RiDVM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=cLcpxWBFGthGtpKq/u4eUFSrl+vShsP5qJHkCTAHnfBu6Sxl+bWS0u5TeBBMAT4INiLG7c+F1yU3y+hb5LBTAXQ1eMdMG/cmRROEy0R1ghaxSp0lTXk9z+8hMxY5H0hunX32XQ2OGF9ZyVMUrCWmYT583r8+L59Dl60uJaA0gkY= Received: by 10.115.55.1 with SMTP id h1mr472816wak.1190222659572; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:24:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.192.9 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:24:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709191024h646f3b3t12bba947029d2b82@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:24:19 -0700 From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> To: "John Cowan" <cowan@ccil.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? In-Reply-To: <20070919164839.GF26549@mercury.ccil.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> <30b660a20709190900r8cad5edxd3f21dbd6c61ad0f@mail.gmail.com> <20070919164839.GF26549@mercury.ccil.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0ed28da1bbb99649 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52f7a77164458f8c7b36b66787c853da Cc: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0263104026==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============0263104026== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_25662_19166214.1190222659569" ------=_Part_25662_19166214.1190222659569 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sorry, let me put it all together: Just to confirm with everyone; that we are planning for a telephone meeting at 16:00 UTC on Wednesday, September 24th. http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 >From Frank: That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for LTRU is apparently working, xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org The log would be available below http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/ (Anyone know how to get at xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org via GTalk -- supposed to be able to do it, but it isn't obvious to me...) Mark On 9/19/07, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote: > > Mark Davis scripsit: > > > Just to confirm with everyone; that we are planning for a telephone > meeting > > at 16:00 UTC on Wednesday. > > One week from today? > > -- > Only do what only you can do. John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> > --Edsger W. Dijkstra's advice > to a student in search of a thesis > -- Mark ------=_Part_25662_19166214.1190222659569 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sorry, let me put it all together:<br><br><span class="q">Just to confirm with everyone; that we are planning for a telephone meeting at 16:00 UTC on Wednesday, September 24th.</span><br><br><span class="q" id="q_1151e7fbc3c1877d_2"> <a href="http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 </a><br><br>From Frank:<br><br>That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for<br>LTRU is apparently working, <a href="mailto:xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org</a><br><br>The log would be available below<br><a href="http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/ </a><br><br>(Anyone know how to get at </span><span class="q" id="q_1151e7fbc3c1877d_2"></span><span class="q" id="q_1151e7fbc3c1877d_2"><a href="mailto:xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org</a></span> via GTalk -- supposed to be able to do it, but it isn't obvious to me...)<br><span class="q" id="q_1151e7fbc3c1877d_2"><br>Mark<br></span><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/19/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">John Cowan</b> <<a href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org">cowan@ccil.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Mark Davis scripsit:<br><br>> Just to confirm with everyone; that we are planning for a telephone meeting<br>> at 16:00 UTC on Wednesday.<br><br>One week from today?<br><br>--<br>Only do what only you can do.               John Cowan < <a href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org">cowan@ccil.org</a>><br>  --Edsger W. Dijkstra's advice<br>    to a student in search of a thesis<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Mark ------=_Part_25662_19166214.1190222659569-- --===============0263104026== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============0263104026==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 14:13:44 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY42g-0006Ju-Cq; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:12:54 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IY42f-0006Jn-CI for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:12:53 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY42f-0006JX-2N for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:12:53 -0400 Received: from n23.bullet.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.242]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY42T-000106-Kh for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:12:48 -0400 Received: from [216.252.122.216] by n23.bullet.sp1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Sep 2007 18:12:21 -0000 Received: from [209.73.164.86] by t1.bullet.sp1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Sep 2007 18:12:21 -0000 Received: from [68.142.194.243] by t8.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Sep 2007 18:12:20 -0000 Received: from [209.191.64.40] by t1.bullet.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Sep 2007 18:12:20 -0000 Date: 19 Sep 2007 11:12:20 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by web300.cal.pim.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Sep 2007 18:12:20 -0000 x-yahoo-newman-errors: calendar-invite.mfsgi2ltn5xea6lbnbxw6lljnzrs4y3pnurwozbngeytsmbsgi2tknbqfvqwizdjonxw4qdzmfug63znnfxggltdn5wsgz3ehi2domi-ltru=ietf.org@returns.bulk.yahoo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="YCalInvites=amNW6i2pEHA9xwjArCZ1190225540-2" From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> To: ltru@ietf.org X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: calendar-invite X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: addison@yahoo-inc.com#gd-1190225540-addison@yahoo-inc.com#gd:471 X-Spam-Score: -15.0 (---------------) X-Scan-Signature: 4b7d60495f1a7f2e853e8cbae7e6dbfc Message-Id: <E1IY42f-0006Jn-CI@megatron.ietf.org> Subject: [Ltru] LTRU Teleconference X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: addison@yahoo-inc.com List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org This is a MIME-formatted message. If you see this text it means that your E-mail software does not support MIME-formatted messages. --YCalInvites=amNW6i2pEHA9xwjArCZ1190225540-2 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="YCalInvites=amNW6i2pEHA9xwjArCZ1190225540-1" --YCalInvites=amNW6i2pEHA9xwjArCZ1190225540-1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; You are invited to "LTRU Teleconference". By your host Addison Phillips: US Dial-in: 1.888.371.8922 International: +1.617.224.4792 Access Number (Participant Passcode): 58371972 Date: Wednesday September 26, 2007 Time: 9:00 am - 10:00 am (GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific) Location: teleconference: see below Guests: * ltru@ietf.org invitation_add_to_your_yahoo_calendar: http://calendar.yahoo.com/?v=60&ST=20070926T090000%2D0700&TITLE=LTRU+Teleconference&DUR=0100&VIEW=d&DESC=US+Dial-in%3a+1.888.371.8922%0d%0aInternational%3a+%2b1.617.224.4792%0d%0a%0d%0aAccess+Number+(Participant+Passcode)%3a+58371972&in_loc=teleconference%3a+see+below&TYPE=10 Copyright © 2007 All Rights Reserved www.yahoo.com Privacy Policy: http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us Terms of Service: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --YCalInvites=amNW6i2pEHA9xwjArCZ1190225540-1 Content-type: text/html; charset=windows-1252; <html> <style type="text/css"> a {color:#0066CC;text-decoration:none;} body {text-align:center; font-family:Arial;} .propertyname{text-align:right; font-size:10px; font-size:13px; color:7A8180; width:100px; vertical-align:top;white-space:nowrap;} .propertyvalue{text-align:left; font-size:13px; vertical-align:top;} .divider{width:10px; } #invite_main {background-color:#806CC9; width:525px; padding:0 0 10px 0;} #invite_main_info {background-color:white; margin: 0px 10px 0px 10px;clear:both; zoom:1; width:505px; overflow-x:auto;} .header_images {height:55px; margin-left:10px; margin-right:10px;zoom:1} #header_yahoo_image {margin-top:13px; float:left; width:249px; height:35px; text-align:left;} #header_second_image {margin-top:10px; float:right; width:53px; height:35px;} #invite_main {background-color:#806CC9; width:525px; padding:0 0 10px 0;margin-bottom:10px} #copyright_footer {font-size:10px;} #tip_footer {font-size:10px;} #main_table{padding:0; border-spacing:0; margin: 15px 10px 10px 10px;} #guests_div{overflow-y:auto; height:40px;} .item_list { width:400px;} .event_time { width:70px; text-align:right;} .event_title { width:100px; text-align:left;} .task_title { width:100px; text-align:left;} .event_title_daily { width:250px; text-align:left;} .add_link { width:300px; text-align:left;} .task_header_priority{ width:100px; text-align:left;} .task_header_date{ width:100px; text-align:right;} .task_priority{ width:10px; text-align:center;} .task_date{ width:75px; text-align:right;} .nowrap {white-space:nowrap;} .new {font-size:8px; text-transform:uppercase; color:#FF6600;} .clear_line{font-size:8px} </style> <body> <center> <div id="invite_main"> <div class="header_images"> <div id="header_yahoo_image"><img src="http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/pim/corp/cal/email/corp_cal_em_lo_1.gif" border=0 alt=""/></div> <div id="header_second_image"><img src="http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/pim/corp/cal/email/gr/corp_cal_em_invite_1.gif" border=0 alt=""/></div> </div> <div id="invite_main_info"> <table id="main_table" cellpadding=0> <tr><td class="propertyname">You're invited to:</td> <td class="divider"> </td> <td class="propertyvalue">LTRU Teleconference</td></tr> <tr><td class="propertyname">By your host:</td> <td class="divider"> </td> <td class="propertyvalue">Addison Phillips</td></tr> <tr><td colspan=3 class="clear_line"> </td></tr> <tr><td class="propertyname">Message:</td> <td class="divider"> </td> <td class="propertyvalue">US Dial-in: 1.888.371.8922<br>International: +1.617.224.4792<br><br>Access Number (Participant Passcode): 58371972</td></tr> <tr><td colspan=3 class="clear_line"> </td></tr> <tr><td class="propertyname">Date:</td> <td class="divider"> </td> <td class="propertyvalue">Wednesday September 26, 2007 </td> </tr> <tr><td class="propertyname">Time:</td> <td class="divider"> </td> <td class="propertyvalue">9:00 am - 10:00 am  (GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific) </td> </tr> <tr><td class="propertyname">Location:</td> <td class="divider"> </td> <td class="propertyvalue">teleconference: see below </td> </tr> <tr><td colspan=3 class="clear_line"> </td></tr> <tr><td class="propertyname"> </td> <td class="divider"> </td> <td class="propertyvalue"><b><a href="http://calendar.yahoo.com/?v=60&ST=20070926T090000%2D0700&TITLE=LTRU+Teleconference&DUR=0100&VIEW=d&DESC=US+Dial-in%3a+1.888.371.8922%0d%0aInternational%3a+%2b1.617.224.4792%0d%0a%0d%0aAccess+Number+(Participant+Passcode)%3a+58371972&in_loc=teleconference%3a+see+below&TYPE=10 ">Add to your Yahoo! Calendar</a></b></td></tr> </table> </div> </div> <span id="copyright_footer"> Copyright © 2007  <a target=_blank href="http://www.yahoo.com">Yahoo! Inc.</a> All Rights Reserved | <a target=_blank href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Terms of Service</a> | <a target=_blank href="http://privacy.yahoo.com/">Privacy Policy</a> </span> </center> </body> </html> --YCalInvites=amNW6i2pEHA9xwjArCZ1190225540-1-- --YCalInvites=amNW6i2pEHA9xwjArCZ1190225540-2 Content-Type: application/calendar; Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="invite.ics" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 QkVHSU46VkNBTEVOREFSDQpQUk9ESUQ6LS8vY2FsZW5kYXIueWFob28uY29tLyBZ YWhvbyBDYWxlbmRhciBWMS4wLy9FTg0KVkVSU0lPTjoyLjANCk1FVEhPRDpSRVFV RVNUDQpCRUdJTjpWRVZFTlQNClVJRDoNCiBDQUxWbGpSV2lOUWhGbEdydFAwWkJC N0RlejZtZFlrMnM0MVh5cVVaSWFJSjR3TmZjRU5RWVEtLUBjYWxlbmRhci55YWhv by5jbw0KIG0NClNVTU1BUlk6TFRSVSBUZWxlY29uZmVyZW5jZQ0KREVTQ1JJUFRJ T046VVMgRGlhbC1pbjogMS44ODguMzcxLjg5MjJcbkludGVybmF0aW9uYWw6IA0K ICsxLjYxNy4yMjQuNDc5MlxuXG5BY2Nlc3MgTnVtYmVyIChQYXJ0aWNpcGFudCBQ YXNzY29kZSk6IDU4MzcxOTcyDQpPUkdBTklaRVI6TUFJTFRPOmFkZGlzb25AeWFo b28taW5jLmNvbQ0KTE9DQVRJT046dGVsZWNvbmZlcmVuY2U6IHNlZSBiZWxvdw0K RFRTVEFSVDoyMDA3MDkyNlQxNjAwMDBaDQpEVVJBVElPTjpQVDFIDQpDQVRFR09S SUVTOkFwcG9pbnRtZW50DQpYLVlBSE9PLVNUUkVFVDpBcHBvaW50bWVudA0KWC1Z QUhPTy1DSVRZU1RBVEVaSVA6QXBwb2ludG1lbnQNClgtWUFIT08tUEhPTkU6QXBw b2ludG1lbnQNCkRUU1RBTVA6MjAwNzA5MTlUMTgxMjIwDQpFTkQ6VkVWRU5UDQpF TkQ6VkNBTEVOREFSDQo= --YCalInvites=amNW6i2pEHA9xwjArCZ1190225540-2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --YCalInvites=amNW6i2pEHA9xwjArCZ1190225540-2-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 19 14:13:44 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY42u-0006WV-P2; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:13:08 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IY42t-0006Uy-Vf for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:13:07 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY42t-0006P2-Lg for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:13:07 -0400 Received: from rsmtp1.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.149]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY42k-0000zf-0W for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:13:04 -0400 Received: from [10.76.40.214] (UNKNOWN-10-76-40-214.yahoo.com [10.76.40.214] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp1.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l8JIBeRY073921 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:11:41 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=P5YFiPUfZcJqOAyBliBVnzJAWwCOeX4FkMZak8m2BEgzHSl3H+nBi5/+A6rWLkc8 Message-ID: <46F1665B.6040001@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:11:39 -0700 From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> <30b660a20709190900r8cad5edxd3f21dbd6c61ad0f@mail.gmail.com> <20070919164839.GF26549@mercury.ccil.org> <30b660a20709191024h646f3b3t12bba947029d2b82@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709191024h646f3b3t12bba947029d2b82@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -15.0 (---------------) X-Scan-Signature: d8ae4fd88fcaf47c1a71c804d04f413d Cc: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org In one minute I will be sending an invitation from my calendar containing dial-in information. In addition to the numbers in the message, you might be able to find call-in information local to your country here: http://www.attvoiceconferencing.com/yahoo/itfn.asp#global Regards, Addison -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. Mark Davis wrote: > Sorry, let me put it all together: > > Just to confirm with everyone; that we are planning for a telephone > meeting at 16:00 UTC on Wednesday, September 24th. > > http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224 > <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=9&day=26&year=2007&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&p1=224> > > From Frank: > > That's 16:00Z or 18:00 in central Europe. The Jabber room for > LTRU is apparently working, xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org > <mailto:xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org> > > The log would be available below > http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/ > <http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/ltru/> > > (Anyone know how to get at xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org > <mailto:xmpp:ltru@jabber.ietf.org> via GTalk -- supposed to be able to > do it, but it isn't obvious to me...) > > Mark > > On 9/19/07, *John Cowan* <cowan@ccil.org <mailto:cowan@ccil.org>> wrote: > > Mark Davis scripsit: > > > Just to confirm with everyone; that we are planning for a > telephone meeting > > at 16:00 UTC on Wednesday. > > One week from today? > > -- > Only do what only you can do. John Cowan < > cowan@ccil.org <mailto:cowan@ccil.org>> > --Edsger W. Dijkstra's advice > to a student in search of a thesis > > > > > -- > Mark > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 20 03:29:35 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYGSM-0008Ti-D7; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:28:14 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYGSK-0008Jg-LH for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:28:12 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYGSG-00085P-70 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:28:08 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYGS7-0004mC-VD for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:28:06 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYGRi-0007sD-FB for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:27:34 +0200 Received: from pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.86.170.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:27:34 +0200 Received: from nobody by pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:27:34 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:24:32 +0200 Lines: 10 Message-ID: <fct7cu$c4n$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> <30b660a20709190900r8cad5edxd3f21dbd6c61ad0f@mail.gmail.com> <20070919164839.GF26549@mercury.ccil.org><30b660a20709191024h646f3b3t12bba947029d2b82@mail.gmail.com> <46F1665B.6040001@yahoo-inc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pd956aa3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d17f825e43c9aed4fd65b7edddddec89 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Re: Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Addison Phillips wrote: =20 > you might be able to find call-in information local to your country = here: > http://www.attvoiceconferencing.com/yahoo/itfn.asp#global That results in an "access denied" page for my current IP 217.86.170.58. I'm anyway pretty sure that I won't make it to a voice conference. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 20 03:44:51 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYGi9-0000lR-ED; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:44:33 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYGi8-0000lC-Gp for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:44:32 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYGi8-0000kI-3I for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:44:32 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYGi7-0005vt-Pn for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:44:31 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 629F51C0129; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:44:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB261C0091; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:44:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5182E58EBBF; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:44:31 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:44:31 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> To: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> Message-ID: <20070920074431.GA28756@nic.fr> References: <E1IY42f-0006Jn-CI@megatron.ietf.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <E1IY42f-0006Jn-CI@megatron.ietf.org> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7aefe408d50e9c7c47615841cb314bed Cc: ltru@ietf.org Subject: [Ltru] Re: LTRU Teleconference X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 11:12:20AM -0700, Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> wrote a message of 198 lines which said: > Time: 9:00 am - 10:00 am (GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific) Does it mean 0900-1000 UTC or 1800-1900 UTC??? _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 20 04:11:09 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYH7U-0007I0-0W; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 04:10:44 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYH7T-0007HO-6Q for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 04:10:43 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYH7S-0006oB-PF for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 04:10:42 -0400 Received: from rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.150]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYH6z-0006kr-As for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 04:10:13 -0400 Received: from [10.76.40.214] (UNKNOWN-10-76-40-214.yahoo.com [10.76.40.214] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l8K8A9Hg049406 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 20 Sep 2007 01:10:11 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=2CtRG0MgkxQfBnJZH2KMTFkYQWdt4LTkWg/m/Af+Yr4egQ+k0TNeXCUydPOGhiWn Message-ID: <46F22AE1.3050701@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 01:10:09 -0700 From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> References: <E1IY42f-0006Jn-CI@megatron.ietf.org> <20070920074431.GA28756@nic.fr> In-Reply-To: <20070920074431.GA28756@nic.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -15.0 (---------------) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Cc: ltru@ietf.org Subject: [Ltru] Re: LTRU Teleconference X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org It's the time previously sent to the list, i.e. 1600Z. (I know it's confusing, but recall that America/Los_Angeles is currently GMT-7). Time of this call: http://tinyurl.com/369ua4 Addison Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 11:12:20AM -0700, > Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> wrote > a message of 198 lines which said: > >> Time: 9:00 am - 10:00 am (GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific) > > Does it mean 0900-1000 UTC or 1800-1900 UTC??? -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 20 10:52:55 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYNOJ-0007Dr-DL; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:52:31 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYNOI-0007CB-0e for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:52:30 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYNOH-0007C3-Mt for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:52:29 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYNOB-0007An-Fj for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:52:29 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYNNJ-0000iw-Cu for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:51:29 +0200 Received: from 1cust31.tnt2.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.12.31]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:51:29 +0200 Received: from nobody by 1cust31.tnt2.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:51:29 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:50:23 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 10 Message-ID: <fcu1bm$h2p$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> <30b660a20709190900r8cad5edxd3f21dbd6c61ad0f@mail.gmail.com> <20070919164839.GF26549@mercury.ccil.org><30b660a20709191024h646f3b3t12bba947029d2b82@mail.gmail.com><46F1665B.6040001@yahoo-inc.com> <fct7cu$c4n$1@sea.gmane.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust31.tnt2.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d17f825e43c9aed4fd65b7edddddec89 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Update: >> http://www.attvoiceconferencing.com/yahoo/itfn.asp#global > an "access denied" page for my current IP 217.86.170.58. They also don't like the UUnet dial-up IP 149.225.12.31. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 20 11:00:18 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYNVc-0005h3-Gm; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:00:04 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYNVb-0005fD-7R for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:00:03 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYNVa-0005f5-TX for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:00:02 -0400 Received: from rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.150]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYNVV-0007Nl-Ke for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:00:02 -0400 Received: from [10.76.40.214] (UNKNOWN-10-76-40-214.yahoo.com [10.76.40.214] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp2.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l8KExQk3066514 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 20 Sep 2007 07:59:27 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ObdamhEhACvwGWf57WL8vqAk4RyCFx2nQZXbjhX0/3HfWoivAjdsbI12clqqXi/9 Message-ID: <46F28ACD.6020509@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 07:59:25 -0700 From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: 70th IETF - ltru session? References: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030FAA@wabex2.sharpamericas.com> <004801c7f0b1$69e76b00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <46E06E41.4030805@yahoo-inc.com> <30b660a20709061446p544bb421nb94dec2e620e3848@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c7f0d5$4013fae0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <fcgojr$efk$1@sea.gmane.org> <30b660a20709190900r8cad5edxd3f21dbd6c61ad0f@mail.gmail.com> <20070919164839.GF26549@mercury.ccil.org><30b660a20709191024h646f3b3t12bba947029d2b82@mail.gmail.com><46F1665B.6040001@yahoo-inc.com> <fct7cu$c4n$1@sea.gmane.org> <fcu1bm$h2p$1@sea.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <fcu1bm$h2p$1@sea.gmane.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -15.0 (---------------) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Meh... it's probably linked to my Yahoo! IP. I'll send anyone the access number who needs it for a particular country, if you send me an email off-list. Addison Frank Ellermann wrote: > Update: > >>> http://www.attvoiceconferencing.com/yahoo/itfn.asp#global > >> an "access denied" page for my current IP 217.86.170.58. > > They also don't like the UUnet dial-up IP 149.225.12.31. > > Frank > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 21 02:25:15 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYbwJ-0008Ht-7K; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:24:35 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYbwH-0008Bl-Dx for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:24:33 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYbwH-0007tn-1l for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:24:33 -0400 Received: from mta3.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.181]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYbwC-0001BY-Jw for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:24:28 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta9.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070921044207.ROOR16948.mta9.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 00:42:07 -0400 Message-ID: <003201c7fc09$c457c4a0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IYOSC-0005b3-Os@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 21:42:07 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Subject: [Ltru] Re: LTRU Teleconference X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org I will try to make this teleconference, but I can't make any guarantees. Basically I'll have to take at least the morning off work. (My employer is highly unreceptive to my conducting LTRU business at work.) -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 21 12:06:10 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYl0h-0007zU-7I; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:05:43 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYl0g-0007zP-DU for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:05:42 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYl0g-0007vK-2r for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:05:42 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYl0X-0005Jp-OC for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:05:40 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYl0B-0007yK-Pg for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:05:11 +0200 Received: from 1cust37.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.10.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:05:11 +0200 Received: from nobody by 1cust37.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:05:11 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:04:53 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 59 Message-ID: <fd0q3e$l8d$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <20070917172004.GB5645@mercury.ccil.org><fcmhh8$oms$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070917220350.GB21052@mercury.ccil.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust37.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f607d15ccc2bc4eaf3ade8ffa8af02a0 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: another extlang concept X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org John Cowan wrote: =20 >> Which macrolanguages in addition to ar, zh, and the special sgn case >> would you adopt for the initial 4645bis registry ? =20 > All of them present in 639-3 as of Date C. That's at the moment 354 extlang-s: =B4 30 ar, 2 ay, 2 az, 3 bal, 5 bik, 3 bua, 2 chm, 6 cr,=20 2 del, 2 den, 5 din, 2 doi, 2 fa, 9 ff, 5 gba, 5 gn, 2 gon,=20 5 grb, 2 hai, 21 hmn, 2 ik, 2 iu, 5 jrb, 3 kg, 2 kok, 2 kpe, 3 kr, 3 ku, 2 kv, 8 lah, 7 man, 10 mg, 2 mn, 13 ms, 6 mwr, 7 oj, 4 om, 3 ps, 44 qu, 6 raj, 7 rom, 4 sc, 4 sq, 2 sw, 2 syr, 4 tmh, 2 uz, 2 yi, 6 za, 45 zap, 11 zh, and 2 zza. In other words 52 sets. Sets that will be likely modified in future revisions of 639-3, while the 4646bis registry would be condemned to reflect an obsolete date C state wrt to the extlang + prefix properties. Your concept doesn't fix this. Some of these 354 extlangs might make it into 639-2, and users will wish to use 639-2 subtags as is, without prefix, let alone historical date C prefixes not more reflecting the then actual Macrolanguage. >> Are later additions to the existing initial sets allowed ? =20 > No (with the possible exception of sgn). Won't help, we could end up with a new language subtag uzw for "Western Uzbek" plus old constructs uz-uzs and uz-uzn: Some uzw folks would try to use uz-uzw, and some uz-uzs or uz-uzn users would try to omit the prefix. Your idea "but it helps with 4647 matching" has merit, but I think the potential confusion for taggers is worse than the potential advantage for 4647 applications. >> What happens if 639-3 removes a language from one of the >> existing sets (e.g. ar-xxx becomes xxx, would we deprecate >> extlang xxx in favour of a new language xxx) ? =20 > No. Also bad, if users happen to know a 639-2 language they should be able to use it in language tags without need to first check if that used to be a 639-3 extlang at date C. >> I think your proposal would allow to replace "up to three" =B4 >> by "at most one" extlang in the 4646bis syntax for a fixed >> initial set of macrolanguages, is that correct ? =20 > Yes. Good, I like this part. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 21 12:14:21 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYl8k-0003jf-Ag; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:14:02 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYl8j-0003jX-8O for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:14:01 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYl8i-0003jN-Uv for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:14:00 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYl8c-0005Un-OM for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:14:00 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IYl8O-0007qQ-NE; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:13:40 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:13:40 -0400 To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: another extlang concept Message-ID: <20070921161340.GQ26549@mercury.ccil.org> References: <20070917220350.GB21052@mercury.ccil.org> <fd0q3e$l8d$1@sea.gmane.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <fd0q3e$l8d$1@sea.gmane.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann scripsit: > In other words 52 sets. Sets that will be likely modified > in future revisions of 639-3, while the 4646bis registry > would be condemned to reflect an obsolete date C state > wrt to the extlang + prefix properties. > > Your concept doesn't fix this. Some of these 354 extlangs > might make it into 639-2, and users will wish to use 639-2 > subtags as is, without prefix, let alone historical date C > prefixes not more reflecting the then actual Macrolanguage. The whole point of the registry is that it makes it unnecessary -- indeed, incorrect -- to look at 639-[123], 3166-1, and 19542 to determine the referents of codes. (It may still be necessary to look at supplementary information to find out what "Ainu (China)" means, or what Gurmukhi script is, but that's a different level of hermeneutics.) > [W]e could end up with a new language subtag uzw > for "Western Uzbek" plus old constructs uz-uzs and uz-uzn: > > Some uzw folks would try to use uz-uzw, and some uz-uzs or > uz-uzn users would try to omit the prefix. Your idea "but > it helps with 4647 matching" has merit, but I think the > potential confusion for taggers is worse than the potential > advantage for 4647 applications. Hmm. You may be right that it's good to be able to add new extlang subtags to new or existing sets. > >> What happens if 639-3 removes a language from one of the > >> existing sets (e.g. ar-xxx becomes xxx, would we deprecate > >> extlang xxx in favour of a new language xxx) ? > > > No. > > Also bad, if users happen to know a 639-2 language they should > be able to use it in language tags without need to first check > if that used to be a 639-3 extlang at date C. 639-2 is no longer authoritative for RFC 4646 language tags; only the LSR is. -- Do what you will, John Cowan this Life's a Fiction cowan@ccil.org And is made up of http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Contradiction. --William Blake _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 21 12:16:17 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYlAm-0006OA-5j; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:16:08 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYlAl-0006O4-6b for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:16:07 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYlAk-0006NA-Sp for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:16:06 -0400 Received: from rsmtp1.corp.yahoo.com ([207.126.228.149]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYlAe-0005Xm-LR for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:16:06 -0400 Received: from [10.76.40.214] (UNKNOWN-10-76-40-214.yahoo.com [10.76.40.214] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by rsmtp1.corp.yahoo.com (8.13.8/8.13.6/y.rout) with ESMTP id l8LGFTwi044152 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 21 Sep 2007 09:15:30 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=eIHw/AgaDL+rlGEm6QtXg7bTB2EENjTMxPCicVRKeU7mkpGP9018mJEbYZ9oAIZx Message-ID: <46F3EE20.6040106@yahoo-inc.com> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 09:15:28 -0700 From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] 3 extlang to 1 extlang? References: <20070917172004.GB5645@mercury.ccil.org><fcmhh8$oms$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070917220350.GB21052@mercury.ccil.org> <fd0q3e$l8d$1@sea.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <fd0q3e$l8d$1@sea.gmane.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by rsmtp1.corp.yahoo.com id l8LGFTwi044152 X-Spam-Score: -15.0 (---------------) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann wrote: >=20 >>> I think your proposal would allow to replace "up to three" =C2=B4 >>> by "at most one" extlang in the 4646bis syntax for a fixed >>> initial set of macrolanguages, is that correct ? > =20 >> Yes. >=20 > Good, I like this part. >=20 Would we actually alter the ABNF? Or keep the extra extlangs in the ABNF=20 for "future use" and/or as a monument to complexity? --=20 Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 21 14:29:00 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYnEw-0002BK-3V; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 14:28:34 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYnEu-0002BE-Ol for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 14:28:32 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYnEu-00026b-Ev for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 14:28:32 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYnEl-0001zc-4D for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 14:28:29 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYnES-0003x4-91 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:28:04 +0000 Received: from 1cust37.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.10.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:28:04 +0000 Received: from nobody by 1cust37.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:28:04 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 20:27:46 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 45 Message-ID: <fd12fb$jfo$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <20070917172004.GB5645@mercury.ccil.org><fcmhh8$oms$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070917220350.GB21052@mercury.ccil.org><fd0q3e$l8d$1@sea.gmane.org> <46F3EE20.6040106@yahoo-inc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust37.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: 3 extlang to 1 extlang? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Addison Phillips wrote:=20 =20 >>>> I think your proposal would allow to replace "up to three" =C2=B4 >>>> by "at most one" extlang in the 4646bis syntax for a fixed >>>> initial set of macrolanguages, is that correct ? =20 >>> Yes. =20 >> Good, I like this part. =20 > Would we actually alter the ABNF? Or keep the extra extlangs in > the ABNF for "future use" and/or as a monument to complexity? Shorter tags are better for RFC 2231 encoded words (that's 2047 plus language tags). At the moment we have 42 as recommended minimal length. Without extlang2 and extlang3 we'd get 34. For a realistic example Subject: =3D?utf-8*xxx?q?yyy?=3D with the 2822upd-03 RECOMMENDED line length limit 78 that's 22 (or 21) fixed characters for "Subject: =3D?utf-8*" + "?q?" + "?=3D", and 66 for the language tag xxx plus the encoded content yyy. With 66-42 that's only 3*8 for yyy, or 8 octets for the UTF-8 content. Splitting UTF-8 subjects into pieces of 2 or 3 Unicode points per line for some cases would be a pain. For a folded line without the "subject:" we get 74-42 now, or 74-34=3D40 with at most one extlang. 3*13 for 13 UTF-8 octets is much better. For an oddity like "pc-multilingual-850+euro" (which isn't too odd if you run CHCP on a command line under Windows, any "850" is actually 850+euro) you'd get 78-41=3D37. That never worked in the first "subject:" line, 37 is smaller than 42. In a folded line 45-42=3D3 just barely worked to encode a single 850+euro character per line. With 37-34 or 45-34 we could do three 850+euro characters per line. Actually the 37-34 case is _required_ for NetNews articles where it's not allowed to fold a header field before the first non-white-space character of the header field body. Of course these theoretically worst cases won't happen in practice, but I'd feel better if 4646bis limits work also in theory (RFC 2231 encoded word in the first line of a Netnews subject for "pc-multilingual-850+euro" and the minimally supported language tag length). Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 21 18:04:55 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYqbb-0003Be-IN; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:04:11 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYqbZ-0003BT-RE for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:04:09 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYqbZ-0003BL-Hl for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:04:09 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYqbT-000061-7w for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:04:09 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYqbC-0004Ma-WE for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 22:03:47 +0000 Received: from 1cust37.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.10.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 22:03:46 +0000 Received: from nobody by 1cust37.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 22:03:46 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 00:03:22 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 60 Message-ID: <fd1f3k$3aa$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <20070917220350.GB21052@mercury.ccil.org><fd0q3e$l8d$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070921161340.GQ26549@mercury.ccil.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust37.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 02ec665d00de228c50c93ed6b5e4fc1a Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Re: another extlang concept X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org John Cowan wrote: =20 > The whole point of the registry is that it makes it > unnecessary -- indeed, incorrect -- to look at 639-[123], > 3166-1, and 19542 to determine the referents of codes. > (It may still be necessary to look at supplementary > information to find out what "Ainu (China)" means, or > what Gurmukhi script is, but that's a different level of > hermeneutics.) It's not more necessary, and in rare cases related to=20 future "recycled" 3166-1 codes it could be even invalid. But generally a valid 639-[12] (in that order) language code is a valid 4646 language subtag, a valid 3166-1 code is a valid 4646 region subtag, and a valid 19542 code is a valid 4646 script subtag. Minus scripts that's as it also was before RFC 4646, and the registries only offered additional tags or subtags. In essence RFC 4646 introduced a process to construct tags from the various sources, solved potential conflicts like the famous CS case, and added scripts + variants + + UN M49 continents + (in theory) extensions. It fixed some RFC 3066 issues guaranteeing stability. =20 RFC 4646 didn't remove the general assumptions about valid 639-[12] language codes. RFC 4646bis might do this, if some 639-3 language codes will be registered as extlang subtags needing a prefix, while other 639-3 codes will be registered as language subtags. For various reasons I think that's a bad idea, we should not "freeze" info in the registry unless it's strictly necessary to guarantee stability. The "macrolanguage" concept is more flexible than extlang-prefix relations "frozen" at date C and repeated forever in 4646bis tags. Admittedly the prefix-extlang notation could help with matching near date C, and likely it's stable for many years after date C and most affected tags, but at some point in time there will be confusing differences between "real" 639-3 macrolanguage sets and the then "obsolete" prefix-extlang tags. =20 > 639-2 is no longer authoritative for RFC 4646 language=20 > tags; only the LSR is. I'm not aware of any 639-[12] code (in that order if both alpha-2 and alpha-3 codes exist) that's not also a valid RFC 4646 language subtag. AFAIK the only way to create a permanent difference is that the ISO 639 folks break the promise published in RFC 3066 and 4646, and the language subtag review process refuses to follow suite. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Fri Sep 21 18:18:57 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYqpN-0007E7-2x; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:18:25 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IYqpL-0007Dp-Do for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:18:23 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYqpL-0007Dg-4F for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:18:23 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYqpE-0000vw-W7 for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:18:23 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IYqp9-000305-53; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:18:11 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:18:11 -0400 To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: another extlang concept Message-ID: <20070921221810.GV26549@mercury.ccil.org> References: <20070921161340.GQ26549@mercury.ccil.org> <fd1f3k$3aa$1@sea.gmane.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <fd1f3k$3aa$1@sea.gmane.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann scripsit: > > 639-2 is no longer authoritative for RFC 4646 language > > tags; only the LSR is. > > I'm not aware of any 639-[12] code (in that order if both > alpha-2 and alpha-3 codes exist) that's not also a valid > RFC 4646 language subtag. I made an intensional claim and you replied with an extensional one. All those who have hearts have livers and vice versa, but "having a heart" and "having a liver" are not the same concept. -- So that's the tune they play on John Cowan their fascist banjos, is it? cowan@ccil.org --Great-Souled Sam http://www.ccil.org/~cowan _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 22 13:12:58 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZ8W4-0000qS-Df; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:11:40 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZ8W4-0000qN-18 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:11:40 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZ8W3-0000qE-Nl for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:11:39 -0400 Received: from mta13.mail.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.44] helo=mta13.adelphia.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZ8Vx-0002MV-Hf for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:11:39 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta13.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070922171108.CXOQ4108.mta13.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:11:08 -0400 Message-ID: <002401c7fd3b$90ecbc00$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IZ7P8-0007b3-I5@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 10:11:07 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Subject: [Ltru] Re: 3 extlang to 1 extlang? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: > Shorter tags are better for RFC 2231 encoded words (that's 2047 plus > language tags). At the moment we have 42 as recommended minimal > length. Without extlang2 and extlang3 we'd get 34. A lot of "math-out" in this post, but basically Frank's point is that limiting the maximum possible tag length (disregarding extensions and private-use) is a Good Thing for applications like encoded-word that have their own limits. With the current attitudes toward extlangs, I'm sure that any plan to introduce a second-level extlang (xx-yyy-zzz) would be dead on arrival, so I'm not opposed to simplifying the ABNF by reducing the number of extlang levels to 1. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 22 13:25:34 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZ8jC-0008OM-1X; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:25:14 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZ8jA-0008Nh-LF for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:25:12 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZ8jA-0008CA-7M for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:25:12 -0400 Received: from mta2.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.178]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZ8iz-0002dR-2k for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:25:07 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta15.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.04 201-2131-123-105-20051025) with SMTP id <20070922170342.PAOK23505.mta15.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:03:42 -0400 Message-ID: <001e01c7fd3a$87bfe860$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IZ7P8-0007b3-I5@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 10:03:42 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f607d15ccc2bc4eaf3ade8ffa8af02a0 Subject: [Ltru] Re: another extlang concept X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: >> The whole point of the registry is that it makes it unnecessary -- >> indeed, incorrect -- to look at 639-[123], 3166-1, and 19542 to >> determine the referents of codes. > > It's not more necessary, and in rare cases related to future > "recycled" 3166-1 codes it could be even invalid. That is one minor potential problem that has been pointed out to us before. It's still conceivable, though less likely than before, that an ISO RA or MA could decide to reuse a code element in the face of widespread opposition, because there are also people who truly don't understand the problems this causes. Consider the following, from the the Wikipedia article "Serbian country codes": "Also, as SB is historic code for Serbia, it was hinted that the country [Serbia] could pursue talks with Solomon Islands. However, it is worth noting that since ISO 3166-1 requires that a code is unused for five years before it can be re-used, this may not be possible even with the consent of the ISO and the previous holder, as users of the standard may object." (This article was reportedly a significant primary source of the "hinting" and was more an attempt to influence the ISO 3166 decision-making process than a disinterested description of the situation.) If an ISO code were to be recycled, or even when one is withdrawn, it may no longer be possible to direct users to the ISO standard for further information. But then, the ISO standards don't usually provide much supplementary information on the "names" they are encoding anyway. > RFC 4646 didn't remove the general assumptions about valid 639-[12] > language codes. It was supposed to. Section 2.2 says: "The Language Subtag Registry maintained by IANA is the source for valid subtags: other standards referenced in this section provide the source material for that registry." There's no guarantee that every user will read and understand this passage, but there's little more that can be done in an RFC. > For various reasons I think that's a bad idea, we should not "freeze" > info in the registry unless it's strictly necessary to guarantee > stability. The "macrolanguage" concept is more flexible than > extlang-prefix relations "frozen" at date C and repeated forever in > 4646bis tags. Wait, are we "freezing" or "baking" if we approve extlangs? I think maybe a culinary "Terms and Definitions" section might be needed after all. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 22 18:59:13 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZDvn-0001RW-0V; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 18:58:35 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZDvl-0001P9-M1 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 18:58:33 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZDvj-0001Al-Ba for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 18:58:33 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZDvY-00026E-0g for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 18:58:26 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZDv9-0007BJ-7G for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 22:57:55 +0000 Received: from 1cust43.tnt3.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.14.43]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 22:57:55 +0000 Received: from nobody by 1cust43.tnt3.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 22:57:55 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 00:57:35 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 55 Message-ID: <fd46la$s3f$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <E1IZ7P8-0007b3-I5@megatron.ietf.org> <002401c7fd3b$90ecbc00$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust43.tnt3.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 82c9bddb247d9ba4471160a9a865a5f3 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: 3 extlang to 1 extlang? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Doug Ewell wrote: =20 > basically Frank's point is that limiting the maximum possible tag > length (disregarding extensions and private-use) is a Good Thing > for applications like encoded-word that have their own limits. While we're at it I'd like to get rid of another "anomaly" in the=20 ABNF, the "registered language subtag" 5*8ALPHA. Three reasons: 1 - Length, at the moment we have 3+3*(1+3)=3D15 as worst case for a=20 language subtag with three extlangs. My calculations claimed that we could reduce this by 8 to 3+(1+3)=3D7. Actually that's incorrect, we'd arrive at 8 instead of 7 for the 8ALPHA case. 2 - Complexity, there are long explanations in RFC 4646 why this "registered language subtag" construct SHOULD NOT be used, it is in essence an emergency exit if ISO 639-2 refuses to accept a proposed language code following their rules. IMHO we don't need this anymore for 4646bis, because ISO 639-3 will deal with any proposed language passing a giggle test. And where that's a matter of timing 4646bis offers variants to fill the gaps. 3 - Identification of isolated subtags, quoting the "known issues" paragraph of <http://purl.net/xyzzy/home/ltru/ltru2xml.awk>: | If the language subtag review list introduces a # language subtag with 5-8 characters which clashes with a variant # subtag these subtags would get the same xml:id resulting in an # XML syntax error. In practice it's unlikely that there ever # will be any IANA language subtag not derived from ISO 936, let # alone using the same string also for a variant subtag. Of course I could also fix this script by using different IDs for language tags and the corresponding IDrefs in prefixes. But that would be rather complex, because a Macrolanguage field references either a language or an extlang. Likely I'd end up with tons of dead code relevant only for 5*8ALPHA "registered language subtags", never used, never tested, and muddying the water. Another approach could be a decree that any given 5*8ALPHA string MUST NOT be used to denote a variant and a language in the LSTR, but then we'd get even more "dead prose" in 4646bis about this construct. Therefore I propose to get rid of it, it's unnecessary in 4646bis. =20 > With the current attitudes toward extlangs, I'm sure that any > plan to introduce a second-level extlang (xx-yyy-zzz) would be > dead on arrival, so I'm not opposed to simplifying the ABNF by > reducing the number of extlang levels to 1. Good. And the more flexible Macrolanguage: field could in fact support any number of levels, even more than three, always at the same state as ISO 639-3. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 24 02:06:12 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZh3B-0004NP-DG; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:04:09 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZh39-0004NH-LD for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:04:07 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZh38-0004Ko-Sm for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:04:07 -0400 Received: from mta11.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.205]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZh2x-0004rM-Nv for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:04:01 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta11.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070924060335.TQCO28177.mta11.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:03:35 -0400 Message-ID: <008501c7fe70$a4bb2970$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IZTsW-00018e-9N@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 23:03:34 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d185fa790257f526fedfd5d01ed9c976 Subject: [Ltru] Abolishing registered language subtags (was: Re: 3 extlang to 1 extlang?) X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: > While we're at it I'd like to get rid of another "anomaly" in the > ABNF, the "registered language subtag" 5*8ALPHA. I don't agree with this. It's our only chance to register a language, most likely a constructed one, that doesn't meet the criteria of ISO 639 JAC but which qualifies as a language under the operational guidelines of ietf-languages. > Three reasons: > > 1 - Length, at the moment we have 3+3*(1+3)=15 as worst case for a > language subtag with three extlangs. My calculations claimed that we > could reduce this by 8 to 3+(1+3)=7. Actually that's incorrect, we'd > arrive at 8 instead of 7 for the 8ALPHA case. This hardly seems like a compelling justification to remove a potentially useful option. > 2 - Complexity, there are long explanations in RFC 4646 why this > "registered language subtag" construct SHOULD NOT be used, it is in > essence an emergency exit if ISO 639-2 refuses to accept a proposed > language code following their rules. IMHO we don't need this anymore > for 4646bis, because ISO 639-3 will deal with any proposed language > passing a giggle test. And where that's a matter of timing 4646bis > offers variants to fill the gaps. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Unilingua "Giggle test" is in the eye of the beholder, and clearly not everything is a variant. > 3 - Identification of isolated subtags, quoting the "known issues" > paragraph of <http://purl.net/xyzzy/home/ltru/ltru2xml.awk>: > | If the language subtag review list introduces a > # language subtag with 5-8 characters which clashes with a variant > # subtag these subtags would get the same xml:id resulting in an > # XML syntax error. In practice it's unlikely that there ever > # will be any IANA language subtag not derived from ISO 936, let > # alone using the same string also for a variant subtag. A 5-letter language subtag that is the same as a 5-letter variant subtag is not an error and is not a problem, any more than it is an error or problem to have a 2-letter language subtag 'af' meaning "Afrikaans" and a 2-letter region subtag 'AF' meaning "Afghanistan." > Of course I could also fix this script by using different IDs for > language tags and the corresponding IDrefs in prefixes. But that > would be rather complex, because a Macrolanguage field references > either a language or an extlang. There's no consensus yet that we will have a macrolanguage field. In any case, this is a question of conflict within one implementation written against a draft, not a question of ambiguity or confusion within the draft. > Likely I'd end up with tons of dead code relevant only for 5*8ALPHA > "registered language subtags", never used, never tested, and muddying > the water. Tons? Anyway, this seems like a better description of extensions than of registered language subtags. Extensions have become one of those awful "deprecated at birth" inventions; it is clear there will never be a registered extension as long as some ietf-languages contributors have anything to say about it. > Another approach could be a decree that any given 5*8ALPHA string MUST > NOT be used to denote a variant and a language in the LSTR, but then > we'd get even more "dead prose" in 4646bis about this construct. See above. An implementation that has a problem with registered language 'foobly' and variant 'foobly' also has a problem with language 'af' and region 'AF', since all subtags are treated as case-insensitive. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 24 06:45:39 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZlQx-0006iP-NO; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 06:44:59 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZlQw-0006iA-Pi for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 06:44:58 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZlQw-0006i0-Fx for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 06:44:58 -0400 Received: from scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.251.195]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZlQk-0003AJ-H6 for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 06:44:58 -0400 Received: from scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scmse1 [133.2.253.16]) by scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id l8OAibsP010598 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:44:37 +0900 (JST) Received: from (133.2.206.133) by scmse1.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp via smtp id 738d_25909086_6a8b_11dc_9334_0014221fa3c9; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:44:37 +0900 X-AuthUser: duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Received: from Tanzawa.it.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.210.1]:59111) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id <S1520DF> for <ltru@ietf.org> from <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:41:22 +0900 Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20070924180934.07983e30@localhost> X-Sender: duerst@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6J Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:14:58 +0900 To: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com>, "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Abolishing registered language subtags (was: Re: 3 extlangto 1 extlang?) In-Reply-To: <008501c7fe70$a4bb2970$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> References: <E1IZTsW-00018e-9N@megatron.ietf.org> <008501c7fe70$a4bb2970$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b4a0a5f5992e2a4954405484e7717d8c Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org As a technical contributor, I agree with Doug. I don't think theoretical maximal length is that important, in particular if the main target seems to be RFC 2231, which I haven't seen implemented (let along used) anywhere. (If somebody has, I'd be glad to see some pointers.) Regards, Martin. At 15:03 07/09/24, Doug Ewell wrote: >Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: > >> While we're at it I'd like to get rid of another "anomaly" in the ABNF, the "registered language subtag" 5*8ALPHA. > >I don't agree with this. It's our only chance to register a language, most likely a constructed one, that doesn't meet the criteria of ISO 639 JAC but which qualifies as a language under the operational guidelines of ietf-languages. > >> Three reasons: >> >> 1 - Length, at the moment we have 3+3*(1+3)=15 as worst case for a language subtag with three extlangs. My calculations claimed that we could reduce this by 8 to 3+(1+3)=7. Actually that's incorrect, we'd arrive at 8 instead of 7 for the 8ALPHA case. > >This hardly seems like a compelling justification to remove a potentially useful option. > >> 2 - Complexity, there are long explanations in RFC 4646 why this "registered language subtag" construct SHOULD NOT be used, it is in essence an emergency exit if ISO 639-2 refuses to accept a proposed language code following their rules. IMHO we don't need this anymore for 4646bis, because ISO 639-3 will deal with any proposed language passing a giggle test. And where that's a matter of timing 4646bis offers variants to fill the gaps. > >http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Unilingua > >"Giggle test" is in the eye of the beholder, and clearly not everything is a variant. > >> 3 - Identification of isolated subtags, quoting the "known issues" paragraph of <http://purl.net/xyzzy/home/ltru/ltru2xml.awk>: >> | If the language subtag review list introduces a >> # language subtag with 5-8 characters which clashes with a variant >> # subtag these subtags would get the same xml:id resulting in an >> # XML syntax error. In practice it's unlikely that there ever >> # will be any IANA language subtag not derived from ISO 936, let >> # alone using the same string also for a variant subtag. > >A 5-letter language subtag that is the same as a 5-letter variant subtag is not an error and is not a problem, any more than it is an error or problem to have a 2-letter language subtag 'af' meaning "Afrikaans" and a 2-letter region subtag 'AF' meaning "Afghanistan." > >> Of course I could also fix this script by using different IDs for language tags and the corresponding IDrefs in prefixes. But that would be rather complex, because a Macrolanguage field references either a language or an extlang. > >There's no consensus yet that we will have a macrolanguage field. In any case, this is a question of conflict within one implementation written against a draft, not a question of ambiguity or confusion within the draft. > >> Likely I'd end up with tons of dead code relevant only for 5*8ALPHA "registered language subtags", never used, never tested, and muddying the water. > >Tons? Anyway, this seems like a better description of extensions than of registered language subtags. Extensions have become one of those awful "deprecated at birth" inventions; it is clear there will never be a registered extension as long as some ietf-languages contributors have anything to say about it. > >> Another approach could be a decree that any given 5*8ALPHA string MUST NOT be used to denote a variant and a language in the LSTR, but then we'd get even more "dead prose" in 4646bis about this construct. > >See above. An implementation that has a problem with registered language 'foobly' and variant 'foobly' also has a problem with language 'af' and region 'AF', since all subtags are treated as case-insensitive. > >-- >Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 >http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ >http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html >http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages > > > >_______________________________________________ >Ltru mailing list >Ltru@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 24 12:01:04 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZqML-0001aX-Cr; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:00:33 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZqMI-0001ZV-NX for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:00:30 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZqMI-0001ZF-Cn for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:00:30 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZqMC-0003Qa-1H for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:00:30 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZqKp-0006kr-TH for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:58:59 +0000 Received: from 1cust116.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.10.116]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:58:59 +0000 Received: from nobody by 1cust116.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ltru@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:58:59 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ltru@lists.ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:58:00 +0200 Organization: http://purl.net/xyzzy Lines: 115 Message-ID: <fd8mql$o8d$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <E1IZTsW-00018e-9N@megatron.ietf.org> <008501c7fe70$a4bb2970$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust116.tnt1.hbg2.deu.da.uu.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 37af5f8fbf6f013c5b771388e24b09e7 Cc: Subject: [Ltru] Re: Abolishing registered language subtags X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Doug Ewell wrote: [Length] >> we'd arrive at 8 instead of 7 for the 8ALPHA case. =20 > This hardly seems like a compelling justification to > remove a potentially useful option. Of course that alone isn't compelling to junk 5*8ALPHA. We have to note this case for the worst case deduction in chapter 4.3.1. =20 > http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Unilingua > "Giggle test" is in the eye of the beholder Sure, and I propose that the ISO 639-3 folks can decide this. If I seriously need say "liaden" I could simply use x-liaden or maybe art-x-liaden. > A 5-letter language subtag that is the same as a 5-letter > variant subtag is not an error and is not a problem Well, I've just shown that it in fact *IS* a problem for=20 some implementors if they look at subtags in isolation: For most cases it works: - 3DIGIT is always an UN M.49 region (if registered) - 4DIGIT is always a variant if registered - 4ALPHA is always a script in 4646 and 4646bis, 4ALPHA as a language isn't used in 4646(bis). - 5*8alphanum is _in practice_ always a variant. - 3ALPHA is always a language in 4646, starting with 4646bis it can be also an extlang. > any more than it is an error or problem to have a=20 > 2-letter language subtag 'af' meaning "Afrikaans" and=20 > a 2-letter region subtag 'AF' meaning "Afghanistan." Oh yes, this *IS* a problem, but it's relatively simple to solve it: =20 a) For an "XML-converter" needing IDREFS an xml:id is=20 case sensitive, therefore af and AF can be used as is simultaneously. In other words the converter can pick any referenced subtag or prefix, replace "-" by space, add "_" to=20 subtags starting with a digit, and be done with it. There are only two exceptions in the 4646 registry, yi-latn and zh-hakka, and both will be fixed in the 4645bis registry. b) For a script working with "real" (cases insensitive) tags it's also simple, your af vs. AF and similar cases are the only difficulty. The script can note the position of the subtag, 2*8ALPHA languages are always at the begin of prefix tags. Other subtags including 2ALPHA can be noted as e.g. -AF, and then "AF" !=3D "-AF". =20 Scripts woking with the registry as their input can use a similar case insensitive logic, I've done this in REXX before I started the awk-XML converter. But as soon as 4*8ALPHA language subtags are used, and simultaneously a 3ALPHA Macrolanguage can be either a language or an extlang, these simple solutions won't work anymore. > There's no consensus yet that we will have a=20 > macrolanguage field. It's in the last 4645bis proto-registry, from my POV it's fine. It would break my REXX script using the "AF" !=3D "-AF" trick, for a macrolanguage "xxx" I can't tell if that's a reference to a language "XXX" or to an extlang "-XXX". But it's no issue for my case-sensitive awk-script as long as all 5*8ALPHA are variants. Or rather as long as any given 5*8ALPHA is either language or variant, the recipe (a) only breaks if it's both. > In any case, this is a question of conflict within > one implementation written against a draft, not a=20 > question of ambiguity or confusion within the draft. No, it's a design issue exhibited by "running code": If you can decide what the type an isolated subtag is, either by noting its position (b) or by noting it in its case-sensitive "pretty" form (a), then that's an important feature of the design. Syntacticaly we'd be better off if we use i-abcdefgh instead of abcdefgh for "registerd language subtags". We could then create i-uniling or i-liaden without identifcation issues for variants uniling or liaden. [Disclamer: That's an example, and "Liaden" might=20 be a registered trademark in some parts of Terra.] > Extensions have become one of those awful "deprecated > at birth" inventions; it is clear there will never be=20 > a registered extension as long as some ietf-languages > contributors have anything to say about it. Anybody (including posters on the ietf-languages list)=20 is free to write a draft proposing an extension, and if "the IETF" likes it it will be an RFC. But let's please discuss the prohibition of "generic variants" like fon?pa in another thread. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 25 09:01:12 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IaA18-0001Dq-MR; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 08:59:58 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IaA17-0001Db-N1 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 08:59:57 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IaA17-0001DI-Cl for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 08:59:57 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IaA0z-0004dc-7u for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 08:59:57 -0400 Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 957281C011C for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:59:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A841C00E8 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:59:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846C958ECCD for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:59:38 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:59:38 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> To: ltru@ietf.org Message-ID: <20070925125938.GA9884@nic.fr> References: <E1IY42f-0006Jn-CI@megatron.ietf.org> <20070920074431.GA28756@nic.fr> <46F22AE1.3050701@yahoo-inc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46F22AE1.3050701@yahoo-inc.com> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199 Subject: [Ltru] Re: LTRU Teleconference X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 01:10:09AM -0700, Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> wrote a message of 23 lines which said: > It's the time previously sent to the list, i.e. 1600Z. (I know it's > confusing, but recall that America/Los_Angeles is currently GMT-7). > > Time of this call: http://tinyurl.com/369ua4 Sorry, I won't be able to attend (children time in Europe), which is not a too serious problem, since I do not have strong information or opinion about extlangs. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 26 01:44:15 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IaPgG-0005rU-UV; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:43:28 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IaPgF-0005rP-PI for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:43:27 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IaPgF-0005rH-CG for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:43:27 -0400 Received: from mta9.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.199]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IaPgB-0002i1-Mt for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:43:24 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta9.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070926054323.QHLZ20630.mta9.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:43:23 -0400 Message-ID: <005401c80000$26b86d80$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IaCpw-0004gT-2g@megatron.ietf.org> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 22:43:21 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 67c1ea29f88502ef6a32ccec927970f0 Subject: [Ltru] Re: Abolishing registered language subtags X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote: >> A 5-letter language subtag that is the same as a 5-letter variant >> subtag is not an error and is not a problem > > Well, I've just shown that it in fact *IS* a problem for some > implementors if they look at subtags in isolation: > > For most cases it works: > - 3DIGIT is always an UN M.49 region (if registered) > - 4DIGIT is always a variant if registered > - 4ALPHA is always a script in 4646 and 4646bis, > 4ALPHA as a language isn't used in 4646(bis). > - 5*8alphanum is _in practice_ always a variant. > - 3ALPHA is always a language in 4646, starting > with 4646bis it can be also an extlang. It's not *supposed* to be enough to look at subtags in isolation. Section 2.1 says, "Usually, each type of subtag is distinguished by length, position in the tag, and content: subtags can be recognized solely by these features." ("Content" refers to the presence of letters vs. digits.) "Position" is an important factor here; there is no guarantee, nor should there be, that no two-letter language subtag will match any two-letter region subtag (modulo case). And in fact, by my count there are 115 such matches: 'ae' = Avestan, 'AE' = United Arab Emirates 'af' = Afrikaans, 'AF' = Afgahinstan 'am' = Amharic, 'AM' = Armenia etc. Exactly the same situation applies to registered language subtags and variant subtags. While it would be a huge mistake *semantically*, there is no *syntactic* reason why ietf-languages could not register a language subtag such as 'boont' or 'fonipa'. Our primary purpose in creating and populating and maintaining the Registry is not to make it easy to convert the thing to XML using scripting languages. > There are only two exceptions in the 4646 registry, > yi-latn and zh-hakka, and both will be fixed in the > 4645bis registry. As luck would have it. > b) For a script working with "real" (cases insensitive) > tags it's also simple, your af vs. AF and similar > cases are the only difficulty. The script can note > the position of the subtag, 2*8ALPHA languages are > always at the begin of prefix tags. Other subtags > including 2ALPHA can be noted as e.g. -AF, and then > "AF" != "-AF". That'll work. That's how I did it in my validator. It's a shortcut that works. But in earlier versions of my validator, I also took shortcuts that assumed that every variant would have a prefix, and that variants would have only simple prefixes consisting of one subtag. There was never any guarantee that this would be the case forever, and when 'fonipa' and 'biske' came along, I had to replace the shortcuts with longer, more conformant algorithms. > But as soon as 4*8ALPHA language subtags are used, and > simultaneously a 3ALPHA Macrolanguage can be either a > language or an extlang, these simple solutions won't > work anymore. Then you'll have to resort to less-simple solutions. >> There's no consensus yet that we will have a >> macrolanguage field. > > It's in the last 4645bis proto-registry, from my POV > it's fine. We also have extlangs in the 4645bis proto-registry, and there's clearly no consensus that those will survive. (We'll see what happens on the phone Wednesday.) >> In any case, this is a question of conflict within >> one implementation written against a draft, not a >> question of ambiguity or confusion within the draft. > > No, it's a design issue exhibited by "running code": > > If you can decide what the type an isolated subtag is, > either by noting its position (b) or by noting it in > its case-sensitive "pretty" form (a), then that's an > important feature of the design. It's not either/or. You need length, position, and content. > Syntacticaly we'd be better off if we use i-abcdefgh > instead of abcdefgh for "registerd language subtags". Perhaps. It might also have been cleaner given that we already have grandfathered i-tags. We can certainly spare the singleton, since it will almost certainly never be needed for an extension. > But let's > please discuss the prohibition of "generic variants" > like fon?pa in another thread. What is there to discuss? We discussed it at excruciating length some time ago, and then ietf-languages registered 'fonipa' and 'fonupa', and that precedent pretty much settles it. We really need to stop revisiting decisions that have been resolved unless we can prove that something is seriously broken. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 26 23:37:01 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IakAY-0000HY-Pn; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:36:06 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IakAX-0000HT-Og for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:36:05 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IakAX-0000DD-Ez for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:36:05 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.69]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IakAO-0000ff-BF for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:36:02 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=BPvOL1pKgIzhvJOsopLYX9Aoe+FUn+HweZ1vb+K/NA7T288Ji6TvmfejHnGvIhux; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [68.166.188.218] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1IakA3-0001mF-JR for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:35:36 -0400 Message-ID: <013301c800b7$f8645800$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> To: <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IY42f-0006Jn-CI@megatron.ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Ltru] LTRU Teleconference Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:39:11 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888a4beb055f130b31a3c891e838fc258656aa0f151a2331eb0350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 68.166.188.218 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8ac499381112328dd60aea5b1ff596ea X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi - Do we have a summary of today's teleconference? Randy _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 27 14:59:51 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IayZG-0003AO-OG; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:58:34 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IayZG-0003AJ-3n for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:58:34 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IayZF-0003AA-QJ for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:58:33 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.178]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IayZ8-0007rn-JT for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:58:33 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k40so4585964wah for <ltru@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:58:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=JvmTsoVuZ9WjRYArPy4p08OMnJBb0JbgJAd9aY0/+ko=; b=MR3G+l8vGZ2psHpa+DKIjeXs1sIEy7BshkiOWiNEF8/nBdouLgOg9Et030oc1xsdPyRq1CCBSbFvVOSGLNzhhFhM2mxZv2RsNnXOHiPU3iQgIZPGRunkKJhT+KChJnG37AqtBEwt7jMxdqh+tUygB6YpW1ZBPLV01Dq7dg6DLu8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=ETVRYMlMQP9lrfqb+19WX2syV7XZKK/966cc7dN+NOvuPzb3Q34BOsNG6FmMSA4k3cRGI2bwLrNi+X/2vFxjfVTp769tNNmTkLZiBnPd/zwl/sAukUojGoHIecrc0VNgJX9/BemypgVqd9gZ7xXM7b1U6mAv/SM7ONVaB3zzU3g= Received: by 10.114.53.1 with SMTP id b1mr281284waa.1190919482933; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:58:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.192.9 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:58:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709271158r5f7be55drb1e9142906c53c87@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:58:02 -0700 From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: [Ltru] LTRU Teleconference In-Reply-To: <013301c800b7$f8645800$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <E1IY42f-0006Jn-CI@megatron.ietf.org> <013301c800b7$f8645800$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 3729cfbaf5df2f76 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 Cc: ltru@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0523279941==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============0523279941== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3241_7193290.1190919482897" ------=_Part_3241_7193290.1190919482897 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline We had a very useful meeting, covering a variety of the issues in regards to both lookup and filtering. To make a long story short, we haven't reached a firm conclusion yet; we wanted a second meeting that Peter could attend, so Addison is setting one up. There was however consensus that we need to document more about matching. Anyone else can chip in if they feel I'm missing something. Mark On 9/26/07, Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> wrote: > > Hi - > > Do we have a summary of today's teleconference? > > Randy > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > -- Mark ------=_Part_3241_7193290.1190919482897 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline We had a very useful meeting, covering a variety of the issues in regards to both lookup and filtering. To make a long story short, we haven't reached a firm conclusion yet; we wanted a second meeting that Peter could attend, so Addison is setting one up. There was however consensus that we need to document more about matching. <br><br>Anyone else can chip in if they feel I'm missing something.<br><br>Mark<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/26/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Randy Presuhn</b> <<a href="mailto:randy_presuhn@mindspring.com"> randy_presuhn@mindspring.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Hi -<br><br>Do we have a summary of today's teleconference? <br><br>Randy<br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Ltru mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ltru@ietf.org">Ltru@ietf.org</a><br><a href="https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru">https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru </a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Mark ------=_Part_3241_7193290.1190919482897-- --===============0523279941== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============0523279941==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 27 19:35:10 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ib2s5-00043b-4V; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 19:34:17 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ib2s3-00043W-Qt for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 19:34:15 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ib2s3-00041P-HH for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 19:34:15 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.64]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ib2rt-0005b1-Cv for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 19:34:11 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=SbFwcEaMcISonlcdSbMKBgrk8nd/Nm+5NCel+HaVokcJnTUMaKYdeg8G8aiTvZHe; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:x-mimeole:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [66.167.78.192] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Ib2rb-0001rp-K4 for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 19:33:48 -0400 Message-ID: <001901c8015f$5cb13f60$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1IY42f-0006Jn-CI@megatron.ietf.org> <013301c800b7$f8645800$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <30b660a20709271158r5f7be55drb1e9142906c53c87@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Ltru] LTRU Teleconference Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 16:37:25 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888a4beb055f130b31a314144a70d5015af8f0c1e2fdf003fdc350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 66.167.78.192 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32 X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi - > From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> > To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> > Cc: <ltru@ietf.org> > Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 11:58 AM > Subject: Re: [Ltru] LTRU Teleconference > > We had a very useful meeting, covering a variety of the issues in regards to > both lookup and filtering. To make a long story short, we haven't reached a > firm conclusion yet; we wanted a second meeting that Peter could attend, so > Addison is setting one up. There was however consensus that we need to > document more about matching. ... The critical question for me as a WG co-chair at this moment is whether we need to request a meeting slot for the Vancouver IETF meeting. It sounds like we should request a two-hour slot in Vancouver just in case. If a consensus emerges before then, we can always cancel the session. However, I would like some assurance that if we do have a face-to-face session, there would be enough people there to make it worthwhile. Randy _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 29 03:20:39 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IbWbY-0004ca-Ab; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:19:12 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IbWbX-0004cO-Fa for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:19:11 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IbWbR-0004Mi-EY for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:19:06 -0400 Received: from scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.251.195]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IbWbQ-0003Ww-On for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:19:05 -0400 Received: from scmse2.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scmse2 [133.2.253.17]) by scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id l8T7J3pk023913 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:19:03 +0900 (JST) Received: from (133.2.206.133) by scmse2.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp via smtp id 63b0_41a827b4_6e5c_11dc_835f_0014221f2a2d; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:19:02 +0900 X-AuthUser: duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Received: from Tanzawa.it.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.210.1]:48062) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id <S15B817> for <ltru@ietf.org> from <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:15:45 +0900 Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20070929160817.096711d0@localhost> X-Sender: duerst@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6J Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:18:03 +0900 To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>, "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Subject: WG meeting at Vancouver IETF? (was: Re: [Ltru] LTRU Teleconference) In-Reply-To: <001901c8015f$5cb13f60$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> References: <E1IY42f-0006Jn-CI@megatron.ietf.org> <013301c800b7$f8645800$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <30b660a20709271158r5f7be55drb1e9142906c53c87@mail.gmail.com> <001901c8015f$5cb13f60$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 39bd8f8cbb76cae18b7e23f7cf6b2b9f Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org At 08:37 07/09/28, Randy Presuhn wrote: >The critical question for me as a WG co-chair at this moment is >whether we need to request a meeting slot for the Vancouver IETF >meeting. It sounds like we should request a two-hour slot in >Vancouver just in case. If a consensus emerges before then, >we can always cancel the session. However, I would like some >assurance that if we do have a face-to-face session, there would >be enough people there to make it worthwhile. If there is a chance that we need a slot, we (the chairs) need to make a reservation until Monday. There hasn't been any feedback to Randy's request, but we need the feedback in order to decide. What we need to know is not whether you think a face-to-face meeting will really be necessary or not, but whether, if a face-to-face meeting will be neccessary, you will (most likely) attend or not. So please select the appropriate option below and reply either to the list or to BOTH co-chairs. a) I'm planning to attend the Vancouver IETF anyway. b) I'll attend the Vancouver IETF if there is an LTRU meeting. c) I'll join the LTRU meeting by Jabber (instant messageing) d) I'll not be able to attend an LTRU meeting at the Vancouver IETF For details about the Vancouver IETF, please see http://www3.ietf.org/meetings/70-IETF.html. Looking forward to many replies, Martin. P.S.: The answer for myself is d), maybe c) (depending on time-slot). #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 29 12:09:23 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iberw-0007ON-GZ; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:08:40 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Iberv-0007NA-Bk for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:08:39 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iberv-0007Mz-1W for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:08:39 -0400 Received: from mta10.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.202]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iberu-000129-Qn for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:08:38 -0400 Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta10.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070929160838.ZVLG660.mta10.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:08:38 +0000 Message-ID: <007101c802b2$fea21b10$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1Ibejy-000422-GH@megatron.ietf.org> Subject: Re: WG meeting at Vancouver IETF? (was: Re: [Ltru] LTRU Teleconference) Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 09:08:37 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org d) I'll not be able to attend an LTRU meeting at the Vancouver IETF -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 29 13:00:33 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ibffl-0006bE-Km; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:00:09 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ibffk-0006aQ-BY for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:00:08 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ibffk-0006aH-22 for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:00:08 -0400 Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.225]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ibffc-0003DT-Rs for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:00:08 -0400 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id n1so2150105nzf for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 09:59:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=l3VAsrouzEUkxwatXWZ7a3HhG3kGELXq8IpwWkadvfI=; b=f6NxnM1utIXHNbEDf1k5h6SkOhzzF4qRDQSpJNDQH+6vqGGN9vTiQ9yHxMmVMdCrsv+9A0KyRSsxvRlK1K7JsJX168Kdb/dQr5erUojcEzEyRh2gj4uzWDnApfnBZOBs7EC3DCcn1o6nNbzFm8W/BidUUyxW3roNuGzA2ENavv8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=dNvy8jkPoyb5XfNUwnSmJFyVBqUqSHZQ4ukWi+ZVkaQzF7Tr01jv9huKUYm4ZiBn1VAGLIaVoCBrhMx9AJSJtsOvG67hvRIVZ3IEbIRWcDs1EDSb5o6oatWCslhVNrB1cGnyx8RUOUJA7PRe4irsUdrsbSLSLrQ06zqH/R2cjTQ= Received: by 10.114.121.1 with SMTP id t1mr2005562wac.1191085184021; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 09:59:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.192.9 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 09:59:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <30b660a20709290959h2ad0d02bw56e2ee6f7a7a381c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 09:59:43 -0700 From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@icu-project.org> To: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> Subject: Re: WG meeting at Vancouver IETF? (was: Re: [Ltru] LTRU Teleconference) In-Reply-To: <007101c802b2$fea21b10$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <E1Ibejy-000422-GH@megatron.ietf.org> <007101c802b2$fea21b10$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> X-Google-Sender-Auth: c6f4fce6ceb88c10 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org> X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1879105792==" Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org --===============1879105792== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_5266_7129144.1191085184011" ------=_Part_5266_7129144.1191085184011 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I see no need for the F2F (I think telecons work fine), and can't attend the Vancouver meeting, so d. Mark On 9/29/07, Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com> wrote: > > d) I'll not be able to attend an LTRU meeting at the Vancouver IETF > > -- > Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 > http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ > http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html > http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > -- Mark ------=_Part_5266_7129144.1191085184011 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline <div>I see no need for the F2F (I think telecons work fine), and can't attend the Vancouver meeting, so d. </div> <div> </div> <div>Mark<br> </div> <div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/29/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Doug Ewell</b> <<a href="mailto:dewell@roadrunner.com">dewell@roadrunner.com</a>> wrote:</span> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">d) I'll not be able to attend an LTRU meeting at the Vancouver IETF<br><br>--<br>Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 <br><a href="http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/">http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/</a><br><a href="http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html">http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html</a><br><a href="http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages"> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages</a><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Ltru mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ltru@ietf.org">Ltru@ietf.org</a><br><a href="https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru"> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Mark ------=_Part_5266_7129144.1191085184011-- --===============1879105792== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru --===============1879105792==-- From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sat Sep 29 13:14:05 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ibfsq-0000Hq-Mq; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:13:40 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ibfsq-0000GO-6n for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:13:40 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ibfsp-0000G7-Su for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:13:39 -0400 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ibfsp-0002os-LL for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:13:39 -0400 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1Ibfsm-0003nw-An; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:13:36 -0400 Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:13:36 -0400 To: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org> Subject: Re: WG meeting at Vancouver IETF? (was: Re: [Ltru] LTRU Teleconference) Message-ID: <20070929171336.GF1350@mercury.ccil.org> References: <E1Ibejy-000422-GH@megatron.ietf.org> <007101c802b2$fea21b10$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81> <30b660a20709290959h2ad0d02bw56e2ee6f7a7a381c@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <30b660a20709290959h2ad0d02bw56e2ee6f7a7a381c@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199 Cc: Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com>, LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org> X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Mark Davis scripsit: > I see no need for the F2F (I think telecons work fine), and can't attend the > Vancouver meeting, so d. +1 -- John Cowan http://ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org There are books that are at once excellent and boring. Those that at once leap to the mind are Thoreau's Walden, Emerson's Essays, George Eliot's Adam Bede, and Landor's Dialogues. --Somerset Maugham _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru From ltru-bounces@ietf.org Sun Sep 30 23:08:46 2007 Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org> Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcBcg-0005Fh-7L; Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:07:06 -0400 Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IcBce-0005FT-Cf for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:07:04 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcBce-0005FL-2U for ltru@ietf.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:07:04 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.68]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcBcd-0003J1-S5 for ltru@ietf.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:07:03 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=bUDeck4bp1bqifVSMWo2a4476EcwtTEGNMBddGEL4zmVy2ftq5/fTkxwOXqLbe9A; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [64.105.136.229] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1IcBcd-000113-3v for ltru@ietf.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:07:03 -0400 Message-ID: <003c01c803d8$a98d7b20$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org> References: <E1Ibejy-000422-GH@megatron.ietf.org><007101c802b2$fea21b10$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81><30b660a20709290959h2ad0d02bw56e2ee6f7a7a381c@mail.gmail.com> <20070929171336.GF1350@mercury.ccil.org> Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 20:10:43 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888a4beb055f130b31a753cd2b62e45a39c0a6a45a2ce8c814b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 64.105.136.229 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Subject: [Ltru] Re: WG meeting at Vancouver IETF? X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Hi - As co-chair - I believe we have a rough consensus to *not* request an ltru WG session at the Vancouver IETF meeting. So, everybody, PLEASE recouble your efforts to wrap up the remaining issues. Randy _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru