Re: draft-phillips-langtags-08, process, sp ecifications, "stability", a

John C Klensin scripsit:

>    Content-language: <3066-tag>
>    X-Extended-Content-language: <new-tag>
This reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of what the draft does
compared to what RFC 3066 does.  It imposes *more* restraints on language
tags, not fewer.  The RFC 3066 language tag registration process can
register tags with almost unpredictable meaning once one gets past the
first subtag.  The draft *limits* the possible tags to a small subset,
and tightens up the allowable semantics.  It allows no tag to be used
that was not already registerable under RFC 3066.

In RFC 3066, it is only a heuristic (or examination of the IANA registry,
which is not machine-parseable) that tells the meaning of the second
subtag the existing registered tag sr-Latn.  In the draft, its meaning
is unambiguously specified a priori.

-- 
John Cowan  <jcowan(_at_)reutershealth(_dot_)com>  http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
        Raffiniert ist der Herrgott, aber boshaft ist er nicht.
                --Albert Einstein

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf