- From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 11:43:05 -0700
- To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- CC: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>, www-i18n-comments@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org, public-i18n-its@w3.org
Yes, please. Although the changes in 4646bis should only affect the contents of the registry, referencing the up-to-date RFC (when published) will help users who need to use extended language subtags (for example, to distinguish Chinese spoken dialects). Note that a reference to BCP 47 does this automagically. Addison Richard Ishida wrote: > Personal comment: > > This markup MUST use values that conform to [RFC 4646]. " should say *... or > its successor* ! So I think we've addressed only half of the comment. > > 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: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] >> Sent: 11 September 2006 01:43 >> To: ishida@w3.org >> Cc: www-i18n-comments@w3.org; public-i18n-core@w3.org; >> public-i18n-its@w3.org >> Subject: Re: [Comment on ITS WD] RFC 3066bis >> >> Hello i18n core, >> >> This is a reply on behalf of the i18n ITS working group. See also >> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3457 for our >> discussion . >> >> Thank you very much for your comment. We agreed to implement >> it like the reference at >> http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#l >> anginfo-implementation >> . >> >> Please let us know within 2 weeks if you are satisfied. If we >> don't hear from you , we will assume this issue as closed. >> >> Regards, >> >> Felix >> ishida@w3.org wrote: >>> Comment from the i18n review of: >>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-its-20060518/ >>> >>> Comment 2 >>> At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0606-its/ >>> Editorial/substantive: S >>> Owner: RI >>> >>> Location in reviewed document: >>> 6.7.1 >>> >>> Comment: >>> We recommend that you say, BCP 47 instead of RFC 3066bis. >>> >>> >>> We also strongly recommend that you add the phrase "or its >> successor" after reference to RFC 3066bis or BCP 47, since >> RFC3066bis is expected to become obsolete soon after it is >> released (to make way for RFC 3066ter). >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature.
Received on Monday, 11 September 2006 18:43:56 UTC