Hi Carsten,
I take your point about copying from a given RFC.
But the history of IETF Language Tags is RFC 1766 (1995), RFC 3066 (2001),
RFC 4646 (2006), and RFC 5646 (2009). It's a long time since 2009 and, as
Martin noted, there have been a variety of proposals for updating language
tags in the past 13 years, so it's reasonably likely that there will be a newer
version at some point. And since language tags are now quite structured,
the chance of not needing syntax changes is fairly low. This draft RFC from
CORE wouldn't catch up quickly, presumably.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Chair - SAE Trust Anchors and Authentication TF
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Co-Chair - TCG Metadata Access Protocol SG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@xxxxxxxxx
(permanent) PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@xxxxxxxxx
(permanent) PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 2:34 PM Carsten Bormann <cabo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2022-06-23, at 13:13, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Carsten,
>
> OK - you need to get this CORE document published quickly.
Thank you.
> But I still think that detailed CDDL would be a long-term mistake, for the reason
> that Martin cited - i.e., copying/transforming grammars among RFCs is fragile.
Well, the RFC is immutable, so the act of making a copy cannot by itself be fragile.
What got us to now propose blunting that grammar is the strong impression that there may be less consensus about the grammar defined by RFC 5646 than we thought. So it seems the grammar in RFC 5646 is fragile, not the act of copying it out...
https://github.com/core-wg/core-problem-details/pull/40/commits/bbe72e2
(I’m making a point about copying here as I believe copying out snippets of CDDL from RFCs and other specifications will be a significant part of CDDL 2.0.)
Grüße, Carsten
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
