W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: I18n comment: rfc3066 or successor

From: Tex Texin <tex@xencraft.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:54:22 -0800
Message-ID: <43D3645E.B87A7D43@xencraft.com>
To: ishida@w3.org
CC: www-style@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org

I do not think that adding "and its successors" is a good idea in the case
of 3066.

The new standard introduces incompatibilities by inserting scripts in
between languages and regions.
A separate RFC is proposed to define matching rules to help in resolving
these problems.
The W3C should carefully assess the impact on W3C standards of moving to the
new model of language identification.
The standards would also need to consider taking on the new matching rules,
as until now the matching rules were defined in the individual W3c
specifications.
e.g. http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/dirlang.html#h-8.1.3
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/selector.html#lang

et al.
The general rule has been simple truncation, which will now give different
behaviors when language tags are changed.

In cases where web standards say the identifier can be anything, and 3066 is
only recommended, web applications that use other types of identifiers may
fail if the matching rules are changed.

The W3C should take a more thoughtful and determined approach to adopting or
adapting to the changes in the RFC 3066 series.

The standards that already say "and its successors" need to review the
impact of using the new format while maintaining the old matching rules.
(e.g. css 2.1)

tex


ishida@w3.org wrote:
> 
> Comment from the i18n review of:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-css3-selectors-20051215/
> 
> Comment 8
> At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0601-css3-selectors/
> Editorial/substantive: S
> Location in reviewed document:
> Sec. 6.3.1 [http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-css3-selectors-20051215/#attribute-representation]
> 
> Comment:
> "as described in RFC 3066 ([RFC3066])"
> 
> Recommend 'as described in RFC 3066 ([RFC3066]) or its successor'.
> 
> Note that its successor is currently only awaiting the IETF editor to assign an RFC number, but has been approved by the IETF to succeed RFC3066. Note also that it will allow for additional subcode values, such as script identifiers.
> 
> > From: Daniel Glazman
> > [mailto:daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com]
> > Sent: 20 January 2006 16:00
> 
> > #8 ok

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tex Texin   cell: +1 781 789 1898   mailto:Tex@XenCraft.com
Xen Master                          http://www.i18nGuy.com
                         
XenCraft		            http://www.XenCraft.com
Making e-Business Work Around the World
-------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Sunday, 22 January 2006 10:54:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 October 2008 10:18:50 GMT