draft-18 is submitted...

... a bit on the early side. Diffs and links and such remain the same from my previous email.

For the editors,

Addison

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

Re: draft-18 is submitted...

Dated October 31 or November 1?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Phillips, Addison" <addison <at> amazon.com>
To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru <at> ietf.org>
Cc: "Doug Ewell" <doug <at> ewellic.org>
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 20:17
Subject: draft-18 is submitted...

> ... a bit on the early side. Diffs and links and such remain the same 
> from my previous email.
>
> For the editors,
>
> Addison
>
> Addison Phillips
> Globalization Architect -- Lab126
>
> Internationalization is not a feature.
> It is an architecture.
>
>
> 

I-D Action:draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-18.txt

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           : Tags for Identifying Languages
	Author(s)       : A. Phillips, M. Davis
	Filename        : draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-18.txt
	Pages           : 88
	Date            : 2008-10-31

This document describes the structure, content, construction, and
semantics of language tags for use in cases where it is desirable to
indicate the language used in an information object.  It also
describes how to register values for use in language tags and the
creation of user-defined extensions for private interchange.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-18.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
I-D-Announce <at> ietf.org

I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-07.txt

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-07.txt
	Pages		: 948
	Date		: 2008-11-1
	
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-07.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

4646bis-18 2.2.4 (4)(e) obfuscation

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

I've done a close reading of
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-18.txt

On Page 15, in section 2.2.4 item (4) (e) we have:
       E.  UN numeric codes and ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes for countries
           or areas listed as eligible for registration in Section 4 of
           [RFC4645] but not presently registered MAY be entered into
           the IANA registry via the process described in Section 3.5.
           Once registered, these codes MAY be used to form language
           tags.

The Referenced text reads:

4.  Omitted Code Elements

   The following code elements from [UN_M.49] were not associated with
   [ISO3166-1] alpha-2 code elements.  Consequently, they were not
   assigned as subtags in the initial Language Subtag Registry, but were
   valid candidates for registration as region subtags, using the
   process in [RFC4646]:

      830   Channel Islands
      831   Guernsey
      832   Jersey
      833   Isle of Man

rfc4646bis-18 "not suitable" prefix usage

Hi -

As a co-chair and technical contributor...

As part of a close reading of -18 draft of RFC 4646bis...

In section 2.2.5 (page 16/17):
   Variant subtag records in the language subtag registry MAY include
   one or more 'Prefix' fields.  The 'Prefix' indicates a sequence of
   subtags that would make a suitable prefix (with other subtags, as
   appropriate) in forming a language tag with the variant.  That is,
   each of the subtags in the prefix SHOULD appear, in order, before the
   variant.  For example, the subtag 'nedis' has a Prefix of "sl",
   making it suitable for forming language tags such as "sl-nedis" and
   "sl-IT-nedis", but not suitable for use in a tag such as "zh-nedis"
   or "it-IT-nedis".

And on page 26
         nedis" and "sl-IT-nedis" are appropriate, while the tag "is-
         nedis" (Icelandic, Nadiza dialect) is not.

And in section 3.1.8 on page 32
   The 'Prefix' field contains an "extended language range" (see:
   [RFC4647]) whose subtags are appropriate to use with this subtag:
   each of the subtags in one of the subtag's Prefix fields SHOULD
   appear before the variant in a valid tag.  For example, the variant
   subtag '1996' has a 'Prefix' field of "de".  This means that tags
   starting with the sequence "de-" are appropriate with this subtag, so
   "de-Latg-1996" and "de-CH-1996" are both acceptable, while the tag
   "fr-1996" is an inappropriate choice.

rfc4646bis-18 example in 2.2.7

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

In section 2.2.7
   For example: The Unicode Consortium defines a set of private use
   extensions in LDML ([UTS35], Locale Data Markup Language, the Unicode
   standard for defining locale data) such as in the tag "es-419-x-ldml-
   collatio-traditio", which indicates Latin American Spanish with
   traditional order for sorted lists.

The example isn't an appropriate example, as it is not a language
tag, but rather locale data.  I suggest removing the example,
as well as the corresponding informative reference UTS35.

This is not a show-stopper comment before handoff to the IESG,
but I hope it would be considered as part of the IETF last call.

Randy

rfc4646bis-18 section 3.1.1

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

Section 3.1.1 currently says:

   The registry is a [Unicode] text file, using the UTF-8 [RFC3629]
   character encoding, and consists of a series of records stored in the
   record-jar format (described in [record-jar]).  Each record, in turn,
   consists of a series of fields that describe the various subtags and
   tags.

If the reference [record-jar] is truly normative, this document shouldn't
be re-specifying the syntax.  But I suspect more properly we should
replace "stored in" with "based on", and move the reference
[record-jar] from "normative" to "informative".

This is not a show-stopper comment, but something I would hope
would get addressed before RFC publication time.

Randy

rfc4646bis-18 section 3.1.2 "at least one"

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

In section 3.1.2 on Page 24:
   Each record MUST contain at least one of each of the following
   fields:

It seems that the first few (Type, and Subtag or Tag) should
occur exactly once, right?

This is not a showstopper, but I'm sure we'll hear about it
from whoever our next reviewer is.

Randy

rfc4646bis-18 broken sentence on pages 25-26

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

page 25/26:
      *  Prefix's field-body contains a "entended language range"
         (basically, a collection of subtags, see [RFC4647]) which
         SHOULD be used with this subtag when forming language tag.

The end of the sentence is broken - suggest 
replacing "when forming language tag" with
"when using it to form a language tag"

This is incredibly minor.

Randy