- From: John D. Burger <john@mitre.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 13:57:56 -0500
- To: Mark Crispin <MRC@cac.washington.edu>
- Cc: Marc Blanchet <Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca>, ietf-languages@apps.ietf.org, ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM
Mark Crispin wrote: > Here's what I think the behavior should be: > 1) If the user requests a "generic" form of the language, it will match either > a server's "generic" form or a dialect of the server's choosing. > 2) If the user requests a specific dialect of the language, it will match > either that dialect on the server or a generic form offered by the server, > but *NOT* any other dialect. As I understand RFC 1766, this is expressively not allowed (Section 2.1): There is no guaranteed relationship between languages whose tags start out with the same series of subtags; especially, they are NOT guraranteed [sic] to be mutually comprehensible, although this will sometimes be the case. Applications should always treat language tags as a single token; the division into main tag and subtags is an administrative mechanism, not a navigation aid. In particular, I suppose there are examples involving Chinese (e.g., ZH, ZH-TW, and ZH-CN) where the proposed behaviour is problematic. By the way, I'm not on - John Burger MITRE --Boundary (ID uEbHHWxWEwCKT9wM3evJ5w)
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 1998 22:56:13 UTC