Subject: Re: [Ltru] matching submitted again...

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:26:10 -0700

Did I miss last call? Forgive me if this is a rushed e-mail.

There are references to zh-Hant-TW, etc., throughout the document. I think 
it directly references zh-Hans-CN as well.  I don't think the zh-Hans-CN 
tag should be considered a best practice because the region type is in 
many ways making the same distinction as the orthography type.

I think the best practice for Simplified Chinese in China should be to 
specify Mandarin or Cantonese explicitly along with Hant or Hans if 
written. The description of the zh-Hans-CN tag indicates Mandarin, though 
none of its building blocks make this specification. This is why I 
registered zh-cmn-Hant and zh-cmn-Hans.

Karen Broome
Metadata Systems Designer
Sony Pictures Entertainment
310.244.4384

"Addison Phillips" <[email-masked]>
Sent by: [email-masked]
06/28/2005 03:16 PM

        To:     "LTRU Working Group" <[email-masked]>
        cc: 
        Subject:        [Ltru] matching submitted again...

I have just submitted an updated copy of the matching draft in which I 
removed the references from the abstract, switched to symrefs, and did one 
or two other housekeeping chores to stay in sync with developments in the 
other drafts.

Addison

Addison P. Phillips
Globalization Architect, Quest Software
http://www.quest.com

Chair, W3C Internationalization Core Working Group
http://www.w3.org/International

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture. 

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

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