RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6
"Debbie Garside" <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk> Thu, 16 November 2006 09:16 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GkdLl-0002xt-8B; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 04:16:01 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GkdLh-0002tS-VY for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 04:15:57 -0500
Received: from 132.nexbyte.net ([62.197.41.132] helo=mx1.nexbyte.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GkdLg-0001LH-5Y for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 04:15:57 -0500
Received: from web2.nexbyte.net by mx1.nexbyte.net (MDaemon PRO v9.0.5) with ESMTP id md50005726415.msg for <ltru@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:18:58 +0000
Received: from DebbieLaptop ([83.67.121.192]) by home with MailEnable ESMTP; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:16:17 +0000
From: Debbie Garside <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk>
To: cowan@ccil.org
Subject: RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:15:36 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807
Thread-Index: AccJR7NekZbU9plURQqQzTTAMkGT1AAFyb2g
In-Reply-To: <20061116062208.GI5359@ccil.org>
Message-ID: <2E10DD4D89E34A65A1E228C7DDD8276D.MAI@home>
X-Spam-Processed: mx1.nexbyte.net, Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:18:58 +0000 (not processed: message from valid local sender)
X-MDRemoteIP: 192.168.51.14
X-Return-Path: debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
X-Envelope-From: debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: ltru@ietf.org
X-MDAV-Processed: mx1.nexbyte.net, Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:18:58 +0000
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 92df29fa99cf13e554b84c8374345c17
Cc: ltru@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
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 wrote: > I think this is basically the right idea, but I'd add the > following qualifiers (this is very preliminary): > > 0) Before publication, 639-6 should be harmonized with ISO > 15924 and ISO > 3166-1 where possible; that is, new optional fields should be > added to map kcal to Latn and kcac/kcao/kccc/kcav/kcak/kcam > to Cyrl, and likewise to map any country-specific code > elements to the 3166-1 code for the country. > Until this is done, I don't think 639-6 is ready for use in BCP 47. Can you elaborate as to your reasons for requiring this please? It is not a problem as this information is currently being compiled anyway. > 1) In the case of a code element identical to a 639-3 code > element, the 639-6 addendum should be disallowed: kca, not > kca-6-kca, obviously. This is absolutely correct. kca represents an ISO 639-3 code element > 2) Supralanguage code elements (those which have no 639-3-equivalent > ancestor) should be IMHO excluded from BCP 47; they are > unsuitable for language tagging. I'd like to see the 639-2 > language collections deprecated as well (though not removed, > of course). There is simply no point in tagging a document > as being in some Indo-European language -- the tag is too > vague to be useful. This is not to say, of course, that > these code elements are not useful for other purposes. The hierarchical system facilitatates the exclusion of code elements "above" ISO 639-3. > 3) Infralanguage code elements (roughly, those that are not > equivalent to any code element, but have at least one of them > as an ancestor) should be represented using a variant rather > than an extension. I am not sure I understand this. Please elaborate. >We could for example use 6kcao, which is > a variant, rather than jumping through hoops to declare a 6 > extension. OK, sounds reasonable. >The script and country values should also be > used, and the variant should be omitted if it contains no > further data: kca-Latn, not kca-Latn-6kcal. Agreed, other than when suppress script comes into play. Debbie > > -- > The first thing you learn in a lawin' family John Cowan > is that there ain't no definite answers cowan@ccil.org > to anything. --Calpurnia in To Kill A Mockingbird > > > > _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
- RE: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 (was Wiktionar… Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 (was Wikti… Martin Duerst
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 (was Wikti… Debbie Garside
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Frank Ellermann
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Randy Presuhn
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- Re: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Randy Presuhn
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Frank Ellermann
- [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Frank Ellermann
- Re: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Martin Duerst
- [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Frank Ellermann
- RE: [Ltru] LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- RE: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Frank Ellermann
- Re: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Randy Presuhn
- Re: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- Re: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- Re: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Frank Ellermann
- Re: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Addison Phillips
- Re: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- RE: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Peter Constable
- Re: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 John Cowan
- RE: [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Debbie Garside
- [Ltru] Re: LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 Frank Ellermann