gmane.ietf.languages

Re: [webfinger] Default language (Was:LastCall: (WebFinger)toProposedStandard

Martin J. Dürst — 2013-04-03T00:56:00

This makes a lot of sense indeed.   Regards,   Martin.


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

Re: [webfinger] Default language (Was: Last Call: (WebFinger) to Proposed Standard

Doug Ewell — 2013-04-02T14:29:31

At least the draft says the name "is a language tag or the string
'default'," thus acknowledging that "default" is not a language tag.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA
http://ewellic.org | < at >DougEwell 

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

Re: [webfinger] Default language (Was: Last Call: (WebFinger) toProposedStandard

Martin J. Dürst — 2013-04-02T10:56:13

Hello Stephane,

On 2013/04/02 19:38, 'Stephane Bortzmeyer' wrote:

I'm also not sure. That's why I wrote "Maybe".


I think it's going a bit too far to say that there was a deliberate choice.

I wasn't there, but it most probably just went like this: somebody got 
the idea that having a default would be a good idea, somebody proposed 
to use "default", and that was it. There was nobody who checked whether 
somebody else already had similar ideas (not only is there "und", but 
there's also "i-default"),...

So there probably wasn't much deliberation. Also, as a draft, RFC 6415 
was draft-hammer-hostmeta, so there wasn't a WG at all.

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

Re: [webfinger] Default language (Was: Last Call: (WebFinger) toProposed Standard

'Stephane Bortzmeyer' — 2013-04-02T10:38:17

On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 10:59:53AM +0900,
 Martin J. Dürst <duerst< at >it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote 
 a message of 57 lines which said:


I'm not sure. Errata are not supposed to be used when you disagree
with the working group, only when there is an involuntary slip. To
quote draft-rfc-editor-errata-process:

We note that allowing technical errata is a slippery slope: there may
be a temptation to use errata to "fix" protocol design errors, rather
than publishing new RFCs that update the erroneous documents.  In
general, an erratum is intended to report an error in a document,
rather than an error in the design of the protocol [...]

In this case, it seems the working group made a wrong choice, but
deliberately.
_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages< at >alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

Re: [webfinger] Default language (Was: Last Call: (WebFinger) toProposedStandard

Martin J. Dürst — 2013-04-02T01:59:53

Hello Paul, others,

ntohuntheonth

On 2013/03/21 11:55, Paul E. Jones wrote:

It would be very good if the people involved could come up with a way to 
get rid of this historic oversight, the earlier, the better. Maybe this 
should actually be an erratum to RFC 6415? It should have been caught 
before that RFC was published, but unfortunately, such oversights happen.

Regards,   Martin.

Re: JSON

John Cowan — 2013-03-21T03:58:28

Markus Scherer scripsit:


The question is, will languages that treat a string as a sequence of
characters be able to handle the full range of JSON documents using
their native strings, or not?

Language tag too specific

CE Whitehead — 2013-03-20T21:41:54

Hi.

    Doug Ewell 
    doug at ewellic.org
       

    Wed Mar 20 15:32:29 CET 2013> I agree with Mark that trying to apply language tags to personal names

Yes, and if "Bob" is not French, "Robert" can be, and many people also do take names that seem to belong to other languages/ethnicityies -- thus you have "Bob l'eponge".
(Is "Catherine" French while "Kate" German? In any case, reading this thread cheered me up for some reason, and also did wonders for the lyme disease in my legs and feet, so cheers!)

Best,
--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar< at >hotmail.com
 > --
 > Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA

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

Re: JSON

Markus Scherer — 2013-03-20T18:05:12

Note that a surrogate like U+D800 is also a "Unicode code point", but it's
not a "Unicode scalar value". See http://www.unicode.org/glossary/
If JSON wants to be able to express all Java and JavaScript strings, then
it needs to be able to include surrogates (and thus all 16-bit values).

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

Re: Language tag too specific

Doug Ewell — 2013-03-20T14:32:29

I agree with Mark that trying to apply language tags to personal names
in this sort of context is confusing, overly pedantic, and
counterproductive. The whimsical examples with intervening spaces and
full stops being tagged as "English" only prove the point further.

Trying to assign "language" to a personal name is especially problematic
for a name like Richard, which (regardless of its origins) has been
native to at least English, French, and German for centuries.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA
http://ewellic.org | < at >DougEwell 

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

Re: Language tag too specific

Richard BUDELBERGER — 2013-03-19T18:02:08

[span lang="en"]I gave a book to my friend [/span][span lang="fr"]Pierre[/span][span lang="en"] [/span][span lang="de"]Schmidt[/span][span lang="en"].[/span]!!!

(Ouf !…)
_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages< at >alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

Re: Language tag too specific

Richard BUDELBERGER — 2013-03-19T17:44:58

And me («] [» instead of «> <»…):
 
[span lang="en"]I gave a book to my friend [/span][span lang="fr"]Pierre[/span][span lang="en"] [span lang="de"]Schmidt[/span][span lang="en"].[/span]!!!


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

Re: Language tag too specific

Mark Davis ☕ — 2013-03-19T16:38:37

Here is what I sent. Looks like the mailer munged it.

[image: Inline image 1]


Mark <https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033>
*
*
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
**


On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Richard BUDELBERGER <
budelberger.richard< at >wanadoo.fr> wrote:

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

Re: Language tag too specific

Richard BUDELBERGER — 2013-03-19T16:19:13

I gave a book to my friend Pierre Schmidt.
!!!…
_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages< at >alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

Re: Language tag too specific

Mark Davis ☕ — 2013-03-19T14:58:43


Yes, I agree that without more information about the interpretation of the
codes, it is pretty much impossible to guess at how to get desired results.



Mark <https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033>
*
*
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
**
_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages< at >alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

Re: Language tag too specific

Doug Ewell — 2013-03-19T14:56:24


John's point may have been that other algorithms aren't necessarily the
best for all purposes either. In some usage environments, it might well
be appropriate to identify a language with the single most populous
country where it is spoken. Other environments might note that the U.S.
accounts for only 22% of English speakers worldwide (Wikipedia), and
might interpret the concept of "generic English" differently.

If the draft did allow both "en" and "en-US", it should specify how
matching or fallback are to be applied: using RFC 4647 or some
tailoring, using the LDML approach, or whatever, and not leave the user
to guess.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA
http://ewellic.org | < at >DougEwell 
_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages< at >alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

Re: Language tag too specific

Mark Davis ☕ — 2013-03-19T06:10:11

Normally you would not mark different names according to their source
language. Markup as follows would be pedantic, and more likely screw up any
software reading it than have a positive effect.

<span lang="en">I gave a book to my friend </span><span
lang="fr">Pierre</span> <span lang="de">Schmidt</span>.

Note also that often titles of movies, plays, etc are either untranslated,
partially translated, or untranslated, such as where I live:

http://www.google.ch/movies?hl=de&near=Zurich&dq=movies&sort=1&q=movies&sa=X&ei=6QBIUfD3Hs29Pcm1gfgN&ved=0CCoQxQMoAA


Mark <https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033>
*
*
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
**


On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Richard BUDELBERGER <
budelberger.richard< at >wanadoo.fr> wrote:

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

Re: JSON

John Cowan — 2013-03-18T20:04:33

Kent Karlsson scripsit:


Yes, thanks.  Brain fart.

Re: Language tag too specific

Richard BUDELBERGER — 2013-03-18T18:16:12


«Bob» being an unFrench name:

"titles" : 
{ 
"en-us" : "The Magical Theater of Bob", 
"en" : "The magical theatre of Bob", 
"fr" : "Le théâtre magique de" "en-us" : "Bob" 
} 
_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages< at >alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

Re: JSON

Kent Karlsson — 2013-03-18T16:44:05

Den 2013-03-18 17:14, skrev "John Cowan" <cowan< at >mercury.ccil.org>:


I think you mean "Unicode codepoint". Requiring "character" whould require
that is is assigned (to a character), and never something as yet unassinged,
making this highly version (Unicode version) dependent.


I think you mean "UTF-16 code unit", as codepoints are encoding independent,
while code units are encoding dependent.

    Kind regards
    /Kent K

JSON

John Cowan — 2013-03-18T16:14:28

Stephane Bortzmeyer scripsit:


SHOULD, alas, is not MUST.


I hope so.  There is another known problem:  by my reading of the
RFC, "\D800" is not a valid string, because U+D800 is not a Unicode
character.  Crockford has said, however, that he intended it to be
valid: that is, JSON strings, like JavaScript strings, are sequences
of UTF-16 codepoints rather than of characters.

Re: Language tag too specific

Mark Davis ☕ — 2013-03-18T14:51:42

If you are referring to RFC 4647, I'm reasonably familiar with it, being
one of the editors. It is well recognized that it often doesn't produce
the best results. It is more a minimum bar than the be-all-and-end-all.

As for "ad hoc proprietary algorithm". Not so much; we use the algorithms
from
 Unicode LDML.



Mark <https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033>
*
*
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
**


On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:39 PM, John Cowan <cowan< at >mercury.ccil.org> wrote:

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