W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: [Comment on WS-I18N WD]

From: Dan Chiba <dan.chiba@oracle.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 01:09:16 -0700
Message-ID: <48537CAC.8040809@oracle.com>
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
CC: www-international@w3.org

Practically BCP 47 is also a locale identification scheme and using "-" 
for both #1 locale and #3 language is preferred, for consistency. I 
think accepting both is a good idea, and more important than which is 
the standard.

Regards,
-Dan

Felix Sasaki wrote:
>
> Currently we say in sec. 3.2 about the i18n:locale element
>
> Its value MUST be either a valid [LDML] locale identifier or one of 
> the values "$neutral" or "$default".
>
> Dan said about "locale" information in his comment just "already 
> defined". So I'd like to hear from Dan how important it is for you 
> that we currently use LDML with "_" or if we could use BCP 47 with 
> "-", or something else.
>
> Felix
>
>
> Frank Ellermann さんは書きました:
>> Phillips, Addison wrote:
>>
>>  
>>>> For locales names in the language_territory format "_" is
>>>> AFAIK the standard, compare chapter 8.2 in IEEE Std 1003.1
>>>>       
>>  
>>  
>>> For POSIX, sure.
>>>     
>>
>> That is what "locale" stands for.  Like "language tag" is what RFC 
>> 1766 and its successors say, and where we'd use "-".  The
>> OP wrote:
>>
>> | Here is a list of items that we think are common:
>> |  1. Locale (already defined)
>> |  2. Timezone (already defined)
>> |  3. Language (used when UI language is different from the
>> | language deduced from the UI locale. e.g. "de" for German
>> | language, "fr-CH" for Switzerland/French locale)
>> |  4. Collation (based on the IANA collation registry)
>> [...}
>>
>> Maybe he confused the terminology, he needs "language tags"
>> in (3), and fr-CH is a "language tag".  In point (4) ff. he
>> mentions some IANA registries, he could also do this in (3).
>>
>> But (1) is apparently about locales, not about the language
>> tags covered in (3).  So in (1) we'd say fr_CH, not fr-CH.
>>
>> That is an important difference, locales come with various
>> settings down to currency symbols, but there are not many
>> to pick from.  OTOH language tags are only about languages
>> and maybe scripts, and there are lots of valid no-nonsense
>> combinations. 
>>  
>>> there are other locale systems where this isn't the case
>>> or for which the separator is indeterminate. There is *no*
>>> definition of 'locale' for the Web and/or Internet
>>>     
>>
>> Well, when I look at the CLDR pages they use unsurprisingly
>> "_", not "-".  That's arguably two standards, POSIX and CLDR.
>>
>>  
>>> There is no particular reason to use POSIX locales on the
>>> Internet and there is some history of abusing BCP 47 for
>>> the purpose already.
>>>     
>>
>> Disagree, I see no reason to "abuse" the IANA language subtag 
>> registry for something it is not, a locale registry, because
>> there is already a CLDR with different goals. 
>>  
>>> If we allow underscore is may actually be harmful, since it
>>> may promote the possibly-erroneous assumption that we mean
>>> POSIX locales.
>>>     
>>
>> Or CLDR locales.  It's a rather useful difference, "i-default" is no 
>> locale, and "C" is no human language.  With "en_GB" I'd
>> get an odd (from my POV) date format, with "en_US" I lose the
>> metric system, get alien temperatures, and a currency backed
>> by hot air.  Which isn't my plan when I say "en-GB" or "en-US".
>>
>>  Frank
>>
>>
>>   
>
>
Received on Saturday, 14 June 2008 08:11:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:17:17 GMT