Subject: Re: [Ltru] draft-davis-t-langtag-ext-03

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:56:10 -0700

Felix Sasaki <felix dot sasaki at fh dash potsdam dot de> suggested:

> The extension defined in this document is not meant to be used for
> (mostly localization related) formats that already align source and
> target text in a dedicated, often XML based structure. For example, in
> an XLIFF file aligning a source like the original writing of Italian
> cities and a target, i.e. the Japanese transliteration of the cities,
> using "ja-kana-t-it" for the target would be overgenerating. Instead
> one would use the language tag "ja-kana".

RFC 5646 does point this out in Section 4.1:

1.  Use as precise a tag as possible, but no more specific than is
    justified.  Avoid using subtags that are not important for
    distinguishing content in an application.

and sort of in Section 3.7:

   When a language tag is to be used in a specific, known protocol, it
   is RECOMMENDED that the language tag not contain extensions not
   supported by that protocol.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14
www.ewellic.org | www.facebook.com/doug.ewell | @DougEwell