Subject: Re: Off Topic (was Re: [Ltru] Great Script Debate Part II: Formats...)

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 08:18:29 -0700

L.Gillam <L dot Gillam at surrey dot ac dot uk> wrote:

> Jefsey's last few statements made me realise a possible solution for
> him.
>
> He identified a desire to use a tag "jefsey-2005" or similar.
>
> Of course, he can do this with private use extensions. This also seems
> to be an applicable solution for his "nations".
>
> So, if Jefsey tags his content with "en-x-jefsey-2005", the list can
> configure its content-acceptance accordingly.
>
> Whether such a tag would only be accepted if it has been given a name
> in every possible language is another matter.

I agree with Lee.  I've thought for quite some time that Jefsey's need
to tag "referent" and "style" would be best met with private-use
subtags.

His example of "jefsey-2005" illustrates what he has said many times,
that his "referent" subtag would go down to the level of "individual
variations."  Since nobody's ever going to register subtags for tens of
thousands of individual speakers, let alone billions (no hyperbole
here), it seems appropriate and reasonable to use the private-use
mechanism for that.

And until "style" is defined in somewhat more stable and concrete terms
than what I have seen so far, that might be a good candidate for
private-use subtags as well.

-Doug Ewell
 Fullerton, California
 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:29:44 +0200

I must rush and may be out of reach for 2 days. There is no real problem 
with this. Again, as long as the format for XML is fine and does not claim 
to be the format for the world and that the five level of 
multilingualism/vernacular are supported, if the QA and openess warranted 
by bilingual tables and the registration is opposed rather than accepted, I 
am OK.

You just may want to consider that:
- there may be some serious political reluctance to "x": it has been 
objected with "xn--" as meaning "exclusion" or "xenophobe" or "christian"
- this is not a real problem for me, but be prepared to the "-x-" to be 
forgotten as soon as some one find a way to support it.
- this will be all the more true that referent will register. Keep in mind 
that the more referent register it means they are interested. Then they 
will probably take over the register itself. In such a case, the RFC 
formula I propose will be a warranty of stability (there is only one RFC 
while there may be many reference centers, with different speed of access, 
added value, etc.

jfc