W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > January to March 2007

R: [PLS1.0] i18n comment: 3066 or its successor

From: Baggia Paolo <paolo.baggia@loquendo.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 10:05:42 +0100
Message-ID: <F534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B29557198EDC2@PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it>
To: "Martin Duerst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "Richard Ishida" <ishida@w3.org>, "Richard Ishida" <ishida@w3.org>
Cc: "Baggia Paolo" <paolo.baggia@loquendo.com>, <public-i18n-core@w3.org>, <www-voice@w3.org>

R103-20 : 3066 or its successor

    Resolution: Accepted

    Recent discussion:
    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006OctDec/0091.html 
    and also by Martin Duerst
    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006OctDec/0099.html 

We are very happy to apply the requested changes to Section 6.1 [1]

OLD:
[BCP47]
IETF BCP 47, currently represented by Tags for the Identification of Languages, A. Phillips, M. Davis, Editors. IETF, September 2006. This RFC is available at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4646.txt.

NEW:
[BCP47]
Tags for Identifying Languages, A. Phillips and M. Davis, Editors. IETF, September 2006. This RFC is available at ttp://www.ietf.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt.

Is this the correction you asked?

~~~~~
Please indicate before 24 January 2007 whether you are satisfied with
the VBWG's resolution, whether you think there has been a
misunderstanding, or whether you wish to register an objection.

If you do not think you can respond before 24 January, please let me
know. However, if we do not hear from you at all by 24 January 2007,
we will assume that you accept our resolutions.	
~~~~~

Paolo Baggia, editor PLS spec.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-pronunciation-lexicon-20061026/#S6.1 




-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Martin Duerst [mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp] 
Inviato: marted́ 19 dicembre 2006 5.10
A: Richard Ishida; 'Richard Ishida'; Baggia Paolo; www-voice@w3.org
Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
Oggetto: RE: [PLS1.0] i18n comment: 3066 or its successor

At 21:40 06/12/15, Richard Ishida wrote:
>
>> > R103-20:
>> > Resolution: Accepted
>> > 
>> > - Request to reference: "RFC3066 or its successors"
>> > - Discussion on the right reference.
>> > - [3] includes a version you suggested. 
>> > - If it is fine, please send final acceptance
>> > 
>> > + E-mail Trail
>> > - Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21)
>> >   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0079.html
>> > - VBWG official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26)
>> >   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0085.html
>> > - Comment to VBWG official response Richard Ishida (2006-07-28)
>> >   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JulSep/0027.html
>
>
>Instead of:
>===============
>[BCP47]
>    IETF BCP 47, currently represented by Tags for the Identification of
>Languages, A. Phillips, M. Davis, Editors. IETF, September 2006. This RFC is
>available at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4646.txt.
>================
>
>Please point to BCP47 using one of the following URIs
>-      ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/bcp/bcp47.txt
>-      http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt

I very much suggest you do not use either of the above, but
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt. This not only means
you don't need to wait for the rfc-editor to make up its
mind about ftp vs. http, but it also means that you clearly
show that this BCP and the RFCs it subsumes is approved
by the IETF, and was produced by an IETF WG.

While technically, the copy at
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt
originates from one of the former localions (most probably
the ftp one), the rfc editor is not much more than a
combination of webmaster and official proofreader when
translated to W3C terms.

Regards,    Martin.

>We are still awaiting a response from the IETF editor as to which of these
>two is preferred. I would think that if you need to choose before we get a
>reply, you should just choose whichever you prefer.
>
>Note that the document pointed to by these URIs is a concatenation of RFC
>4646 and RFC 4647.  If talking about a specific RFC, however, be sure to say
>'or its successor', since we are expecting a successor to appear in a few
>months time.
>
>Cheers,
>RI
>
>============
>Richard Ishida
>Internationalization Lead
>W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
>
>http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
>http://www.w3.org/International/
>http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/
> 
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org 
>> [mailto:public-i18n-core-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Richard Ishida
>> Sent: 28 July 2006 12:40
>> To: 'Baggia Paolo'; www-voice@w3.org
>> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: [PLS1.0] i18n comment: 3066 or its successor
>> 
>> 
>> Hi Paolo,
>> 
>> I think we can substantially improve on the reference in SVG 
>> Mobile by pointing to BCP 47 directly.  The problem is 
>> choosing which of the several direct links is best.
>> 
>> I have sent a note to the person at the IETF who is 
>> shepherding RFC 3066bis, and will let you know his reply.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> RI 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> ============
>> Richard Ishida
>> Internationalization Lead
>> W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
>> http://www.w3.org/International/
>> http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/


Gruppo Telecom Italia - Direzione e coordinamento di Telecom Italia S.p.A.

================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please send an e_mail to <mailto:webmaster@telecomitalia.it>webmaster@telecomitalia.it. Thank you<http://www.loquendo.com>www.loquendo.com
================================================
Received on Monday, 8 January 2007 09:06:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 8 January 2007 09:06:07 GMT