Subject: [Ltru] Re: [psg.com #886] registry should add French translations

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 01:11:17 +0000

Hi -

(co-chair hat ON)

The question of adding French translations of specific fields in the registry
was raised in http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg00094.html

Though this was discussed at some length on the ietf-languages list, I'd like to
verify that we have a rough consensus in this WG.  I believe that consensus is
to reject this proposal.  Please speak up if you have compelling technical arguments
that this WG should add French translations of specific fields in the registry.

Randy

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

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 01:11:17 +0000

Hi -

(co-chair hat ON)

Randy

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 17:43:06 +0200

>that this WG should add French translations of specific fields in the 

(Various hats ON)

I am surprised by this. I will only repeat my position expressed often on 
the IETF main list and to this IETF WG-ltru: French and English are equally 
compelling for the IANA language tags registry, for reasons which should be 
obvious for standadizers of a global system.

Among these reasons:

- this is the rule of the ISO standards considered by the Charter. 
Additions to these standards are to be homogenous with these standards.
- they make sure that at least experts from two major visions were 
involved: a protection of the interests and rights of every other culture.
- this is a necessary technical seed for the support of multilingualism 
over internationalisation. ISO biculturalism is a first step to what should 
extend to other languages like Spanish, Russian, Chinese and Arabic and, 
further on to every languages, as required by a Multilingual Internet.

The error of RFC 3066 in that area MUST not be repeated. I measure the 
technical complexity of the Multilingual Internet, the IAB avoided to 
consider among its RFC 3869's R&D priorities. But I think that to leave its 
architectural organization to a grassroots process is inappropriate. 
Langtags are by essence the basic building blocks of this evolution. They 
must be standardized as such.

The lack of lingual consistency between BCP 047 and ISO standards would 
therefore prevent any consensus. A lack of consideration of multilingualism 
can only to a Internet balkanization we do not want.

J-F C. Morfin

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:31:07 -0700

Hi -

> From: <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 6:11 PM
> Subject: [Ltru] Re: [psg.com #886] registry should add French translations
>

> that this WG should add French translations of specific fields in the registry.

There were no follow-ups in this thread.  The question did receive some discussion
in the thread for issue [psg.com #882].  That discussion confirms what I believe is
a rough consensus to reject this item, so I'm changing its tracker status to "rejected."

Randy, ltru co-chair