Re: updated demo

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 11:38:07AM -0700,
 Mark Davis ? <mark <at> macchiato.com> wrote 
 a message of 39 lines which said:

> I updated the demo at http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/languageid.jsp
> to parse extlangs. The samples include official languages and the
> scripts they use (based on CLDR data), and the names have
> localizations where available.

1) When asking for 'ca', the language is correctly identified but the
link from 'ca' goes to 'cat'. I understand the rationale (always link
to the Ethnologue) but it is confusing. It is even worse if you type
'fra', your interface redirects to 'fr' but then offers a link to
'fra'.

2) How do you choose the language name to display? 'zza' has four
names in Ethnologue (and in 4645bis), why displaying only 'Zaza'?
Because it is the first one in 4645bis?

Re: updated demo

Re: updated demo

> 2) How do you choose the language name to display? 'zza' has four
> names in Ethnologue (and in 4645bis), why displaying only 'Zaza'?
> Because it is the first one in 4645bis?

Note that the first name is typically the ISO 639-3 reference name, see:

  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-23#section-3.1.5

Addison

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

Re: updated demo

"Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon dot com> wrote:

> Note that the first name is typically the ISO 639-3 reference name, 
> see:
>
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-23#section-3.1.5

In fact, draft-4645bis moves things around when possible to ensure that 
the ISO 639-3 reference name is first, see:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-10#section-2.3

That said, tools should attempt to display all of the Description fields 
when possible, and use the first Description field alone only when some 
constraint prevents displaying the others.  All of the Description 
fields are correct for the given subtag.

We just had another thread on ietf-languages in which a contributor 
apparently thought 'ca' was inadequate to tag "Valencian" content; I 
don't know if that was because "Catalan" is listed first or because he 
truly believes they are different languages.

 --
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

Re: updated demo

Re: updated demo

Re: updated demo

Mark Davis ⌛ wrote:

> The concatenated Descriptions are much too long in some environments. 
> In a UI pulldown list or menu, for example, displaying all of the 
> names is not really feasible; it leads to much too wide a list for 
> normal UIs.

I did say, "... only when some constraint prevents displaying the 
others."  If you have a drop-down list, that would be such a constraint. 
I do the same thing in my app: if you type "ca" the drop-down list shows 
"Catalan," but both "Catalan" and "Valencian" are available on the 
drop-down list, and both display "ca".

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

Fw: 75th IETF - Final Agenda

Hi -

Forwarded for your information.

Randy

> From: "IETF Agenda" <agenda <at> ietf.org>
> To: "IETF Announcement list" <ietf-announce <at> ietf.org>
> Cc: <irsg <at> isi.edu>; <wgchairs <at> ietf.org>; <bofchairs <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 10:40 PM
> Subject: 75th IETF - Final Agenda 
>
> The Final agenda is now available at:
> http://www.ietf.org/meetings/75/
> 
> Online registration for the IETF meeting is at:
> http://www.ietf.org/meetings/75/
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> IETF-Announce <at> ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomaly in upcoming registry)

Randy posted to the ietf-languages thread (below) that most of you are probably aware of, the following
message. I'm cross-posting it so that I can respond.

I oppose rechartering LTRU at this time. We've completed the essential work of incorporating ISO 639-3 and
our work has brought a few other enhancements. I think we've allowed sufficient room for the registration
process to do its magic and handle most of the language identification community's needs. I would like to
see the new document in use for awhile before we go to tinkering with it.

If ISO 639-6 were ready (as it is not), then LTRU could be reconstituted to look into whether or not to
incorporate it (and if so, how). I suspect it might be a couple of years before that is upon us. In the
meantime, we could use some experience with rfc-to-be-4646bis. Constant rewriting will not improve matters.

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-languages-bounces <at> alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces <at> alvestrand.no] On
Behalf Of Randy Presuhn
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 11:51 PM
To: ietf-languages <at> iana.org
Subject: Re: Anomaly in upcoming registry

Hi -

Discussion of re-chartering the ltru working group belongs on
the ltru <at> ietf.org mailing list, not here.  This is the time
for such discussions.

Randy
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen <at> openprogress.org>
To: "Doug Ewell" <doug <at> ewellic.org>
Cc: <ietf-languages <at> iana.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: Anomaly in upcoming registry


Hoi,
With all due respect for the diligence of the process but when you consider
the length of time it took, the ISO-639-6 will make this same process
impossible because of the amount of data involved. When this process only
starts when the publication is imminent, it will take maybe at least a
decade based on the number of new entries that ISO 639-6 will bring. That
means imho that for ISO-639-6 we will have to rethink the process. We do
have room before the publication of the new standard.. it could be seen as
pre-emptive involvement because of the huge amount of data involved.
Thanks,
       Gerard

2009/7/13 Doug Ewell <doug <at> ewellic.org>

> Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring dot com> wrote:
>
> > There's no way that I'd be willing to start another round of ltru
> > revsions to make the handling of such a hypothetical any clearer.  At
> > some point folks need to realize that the BCP is not an algorithm for
> > execution by finite state automata.  It gives guidelines to humans
> > who, one would hope, are capable of exercising a bit of common sense.
>
> I would hope it's blindingly obvious to Randy and everyone else that I
> agree with this statement.  I would not want to start another round of
> LTRU revisions for almost any reason.
>
> Every so often we talk about adding ISO 639-6 support, which would be a
> good enough reason, but only if (a) the draft and data were fully
> available for WG review, (b) ISO publication appeared imminent, and (c)
> the WG had some hope of agreeing where to put the subtags
> architecturally.
>
> --
> Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
> http://www.ewellic.org

> http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html

> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages <at> alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

>



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages <at> alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

>


_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages <at> alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

Re: rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomaly in upcoming registry)

+1

-----Original Message-----
From: ltru-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of Phillips, Addison
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 8:26 AM
To: LTRU Working Group
Subject: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomaly in upcoming registry)

Randy posted to the ietf-languages thread (below) that most of you are probably aware of, the following
message. I'm cross-posting it so that I can respond.

I oppose rechartering LTRU at this time. We've completed the essential work of incorporating ISO 639-3 and
our work has brought a few other enhancements. I think we've allowed sufficient room for the registration
process to do its magic and handle most of the language identification community's needs. I would like to
see the new document in use for awhile before we go to tinkering with it.

If ISO 639-6 were ready (as it is not), then LTRU could be reconstituted to look into whether or not to
incorporate it (and if so, how). I suspect it might be a couple of years before that is upon us. In the
meantime, we could use some experience with rfc-to-be-4646bis. Constant rewriting will not improve matters.

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-languages-bounces <at> alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces <at> alvestrand.no] On
Behalf Of Randy Presuhn
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 11:51 PM
To: ietf-languages <at> iana.org
Subject: Re: Anomaly in upcoming registry

Hi -

Discussion of re-chartering the ltru working group belongs on
the ltru <at> ietf.org mailing list, not here.  This is the time
for such discussions.

Randy
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen <at> openprogress.org>
To: "Doug Ewell" <doug <at> ewellic.org>
Cc: <ietf-languages <at> iana.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: Anomaly in upcoming registry


Hoi,
With all due respect for the diligence of the process but when you consider
the length of time it took, the ISO-639-6 will make this same process
impossible because of the amount of data involved. When this process only
starts when the publication is imminent, it will take maybe at least a
decade based on the number of new entries that ISO 639-6 will bring. That
means imho that for ISO-639-6 we will have to rethink the process. We do
have room before the publication of the new standard.. it could be seen as
pre-emptive involvement because of the huge amount of data involved.
Thanks,
       Gerard

2009/7/13 Doug Ewell <doug <at> ewellic.org>

> Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring dot com> wrote:
>
> > There's no way that I'd be willing to start another round of ltru
> > revsions to make the handling of such a hypothetical any clearer.  At
> > some point folks need to realize that the BCP is not an algorithm for
> > execution by finite state automata.  It gives guidelines to humans
> > who, one would hope, are capable of exercising a bit of common sense.
>
> I would hope it's blindingly obvious to Randy and everyone else that I
> agree with this statement.  I would not want to start another round of
> LTRU revisions for almost any reason.
>
> Every so often we talk about adding ISO 639-6 support, which would be a
> good enough reason, but only if (a) the draft and data were fully
> available for WG review, (b) ISO publication appeared imminent, and (c)
> the WG had some hope of agreeing where to put the subtags
> architecturally.
>
> --
> Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
> http://www.ewellic.org

> http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html

> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages <at> alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

>



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages <at> alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

>


_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages <at> alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru