In <731421856(_dot_)412006(_dot_)KLENSIN(_at_)INFOODS(_dot_)UNU(_dot_)EDU>,
John wrote:
Re the argument about numbers vs two-letter codes, vs names...
As the person who opened my big mouth and this argument, let me
attempt to close them.
-- The name by which a language is called is politically and socially
sensitive almost anywhere. Whatever we do should, to the degree possible,
reference something externally developed and generally agreed on, not
try to invent our own rules. Whatever else already exists, "they" have
already shed the requisite liters of blood--there is no value whatsoever
in our repeating the experience.
I agree completely, and I was not trying to propose that we do
otherwise. I brought it up only:
1. to make sure that there wasn't also an extant ISO standard
which used full names, and
2. to voice my displeasure, in general, with the use of
cryptic codes where longer names could be more useful.
I had hoped that even if the extant standards defined codes, the
names from those standards might have been useful (much as some
people use the long names of characters from various character
set standards, as well as or instead of the assigned codes), but
I gather that the names in the extant standards contain errors.
I might point out (indeed, I only ventured to bring up
alternatives because of the fact) that Kermit manages to get away
with multinational character set support involving a language
tag, the value of which is the full name (in English) of some
language, but of course Kermit doesn't have the same constituency
as IETF.
Finally (and not to reopen the argument), let me say that the
argument is closed based on the practical impossibility of
devising a better solution than numeric or two-letter codes, and
not on any implementational superiority of those codes. If anyone
seriously believes that cryptic codes are significantly easier to
implement, and that this matters for MIME, I expect them to begin
lobbying for
Content-Type: TE/PL
or
Content-Type: 01/00
or even
HDR53: 01/00
:-) .
Steve Summit
scs(_at_)adam(_dot_)mit(_dot_)edu