Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: Compatibility with existing use (LDAP)

From: "Peter Constable" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 05:04:35 -0700

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On
> Behalf Of Frank Ellermann

> For "expecting" read "one side is old and uses language or
> language-region", and for "understanding" read "the old side
> doesn't support any language-script constructs".  Bye, Frank

But in what sense would the old side not be supporting language-script
constructs? These exist and conform to RFC 3066, so if the old side is
incapable of supporting them, it is not a 3066-conformant implementation
that we need to worry about. 

Peter Constable

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

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 17:38:09 +0200

>that we need to worry about.

Dear Peter,
I am not particularly interested in the APMD format since it does not fit 
my needs and I will not be able to use it.

But would it be easier if you built a simple decision tree, documenting 
who/which application needs which information, when, how, for what, what it 
will do with it? After months I am still unable to understand what most in 
this WG want to do with langtags (to the point that the only comment I 
received to that question is that such a question is "editorial").

For example, let assume you have a document with "jfc-jefs-ey" as a 
langtag. Exactly what will happen? Will this be different if that document 
is XML, HTML, CLDR, LDAP, etc.

Thank you for your help understanding this.
jfc