RE: New version of language tutorial

I thought what I was favoring was the same thing you are favoring ;-).

Addison P. Phillips
Director, Globalization Architecture
webMethods | Delivering Global Business Visibility
http://www.webMethods.com
Chair, W3C Internationalization (I18N) Working Group
Chair, W3C-I18N-WG, Web Services Task Force
http://www.w3.org/International

Internationalization is an architecture. 
It is not a feature.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tex Texin [mailto:tex@xencraft.com]
> Sent: jeudi 11 mars 2004 17:22
> To: Richard Ishida
> Cc: aphillips@webmethods.com; 'GEO'
> Subject: Re: New version of language tutorial
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > > Note that this topic is VERY controversial (in certain
> > > circles). es-americas was rejected by the RFC3066 language
> > > tag reviewer. I read this as taking a position on that
> > > argument (one that I favor, but one that someone could object too).
> 
> Guess who! ;-) Why do you favor it?
> It seems very reasonable to me, if you have defined words that 
> are acceptable
> in the Americas and not perhaps in Europe, to have a label to 
> distinguish it
> from other versions (such as an es-mx if it exists) and not have 
> it confused
> with an es, for which it may not be appropriate.
> 
> From a w3c perspective, it would be nice for a user to specify to 
> their UA that
> they would like to accept language such as es-americas, without 
> having to list
> every latin american country and give it greater priority than 
> es, or es-es,
> etc.
> 
> Perhaps we should ask on the ig list, if there are latin-american 
> users that
> have an opinion.
> 
> (Just to collect data, not to argue the point.)

Received on Thursday, 11 March 2004 23:37:49 UTC