Re: telco this Friday

Dear all,

thanks for all your input to the language coding issue.

I have now written the following in the document:

When specifying the language of a literal, in this document we adhere to 
to Best Common Practice 5646 
(http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt). According to BCP 5646, 
tags are made up of a language code (a three letter ISO 639-3 code or a 
two letter ISO 639-1 code if available, see 
http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/language_codes.htm) followed by a 
hyphen and a ISO 3166-1 country code 
(http://www.iso.org/iso/iso-3166-1_decoding_table.html).
We follow the convention of writing the language codes in lower case and 
the country codes in upper case.
However, this is not part of the specification of this document; users 
of the lexicon-ontology model can adopt any strategy to specify the 
language, though we strongly recommend to follow BCP 5646.

I think this is in line with all your contributions.

Let me know otherwise.

Philipp.

Am 30.01.14 12:23, schrieb Felix Sasaki:
> Am 30.01.14 12:09, schrieb John P. McCrae:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Philipp Cimiano 
>> <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de 
>> <mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>> wrote:
>>
>>     Dear all,
>>
>>      I am afraid I will not be able to attend the ontolex telco this
>>     Friday. I will now work on the document, so please provide your
>>     feedback by email.
>>
>>     I would kindly ask you all to work on the sections in the
>>     document assigned to you ;-)
>>
>>     Other that that I wanted to clarify one issue regarding language
>>     codes in the example.
>>
>>     I have seen that some people (John?) have started to use the ISO
>>     639-2 codes (e.g. "ENG" for English, "SPA" for Spanish etc.).
>>     I would propose we stick to the ISO 639-1 two-letter ISO 639-1
>>     codes (e.g. "EN", "ES") etc. There is no particular reason for
>>     this other than the fact that most people know these codes.
>>
>> Yes that would be me, I use the ISO 639-3 codes as they represent the 
>> most complete and usable list of codes. At any rate, this is not part 
>> of our standardization efforts and applications must support 
>> well-formatted codes using any ISO standard
>>
>>
>>     If the argument is recency and reusing the newest standard, then
>>     we would have to go anyway for four letter codes according to ISO
>>     639-6.
>>
>> Erm 639-6 has a different purpose... it is not really appropriate 
>> here (and is equal to 639-3 for standard languages anyway)
>>
>>
>>     Regarding the particular versions of a language spoken in a
>>     particular country, I recommend we follow the principle of IETF
>>     tags which consists of the ISO code followed (if applicable) by a
>>     hyphen and the ISO 3166-1 code of the country. Thus the variation
>>     of English spoken
>>     in the United States would be: "en-us" while the version of
>>     English spoken in Great Britain would be "en-gb".
>>
>> There is a standard for this, namely RFC 5646
>
> Hi John, all,
>
> just to be picky, there is BCP 47 ("Best Common Practice") that 
> defines language tags and matching of language tags. Various RFCs have 
> been published about language tags, but the stable reference, that is 
> "latest version" identifier for this, is always
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt
> or in HTML http://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp47
> currently it says "Request for Comments: 5646" at the top (the languge 
> tag part) and RFC 4647 later (the matching part). You can find the 
> previous RFCs by clickling on the "obsoletes" links, e.g. "Obsoletes: 
> 4646 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4646> "
>
> - Felix
>
>> , and we should follow that as with all RDF. (It does agree with your 
>> proposal here though)
>>
>> Regards,
>> John
>>
>>
>>     I hope this is fine for everyone. I will add this information to
>>     the document.
>>
>>     Regards,
>>
>>     Philipp.
>>
>>     -- 
>>
>>     Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
>>
>>     Phone: +49 521 106 12249 <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%2012249>
>>     Fax: +49 521 106 12412 <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%2012412>
>>     Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
>>     <mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
>>
>>     Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS)
>>     Raum 2.307
>>     Universität Bielefeld
>>     Inspiration 1
>>     33619 Bielefeld
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 

Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano

Phone: +49 521 106 12249
Fax: +49 521 106 12412
Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de

Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS)
Raum 2.307
Universität Bielefeld
Inspiration 1
33619 Bielefeld