IETF policy on encodings and languages

[Sean Conner]

It was thus said that the Great Arav K. once stated:
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 02:40:42PM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> > b) What language is used for those META parts, since the server does not
> > know what languages are acceptable to the user?  TL;dr answer: start with
> > English, add other languages as necessarily or useful.
> 
> The best-case scenario, of course, is that everybody sees the
> human-readable META parts in their own language.  The issue with that is
> either the client has to specify what language they expect it in, or the
> server has to provide it in every language it supports.  Both are
> obviously flawed.

  Here's a list of resonse codes with the type of META information they use:

	10	prompt, human text
	11	prmopt, human text
	20	MIME type
	30	URI
	31	URI
	40	error message, human text
	41	error message, human text
	42	error message, human text
	43	error message, human text
	44	SECONDS
	50	error message, human text
	51	error message, human text
	52	error message, human text
	53	error message, human text
	59	error message, human text
	60	error message, numan text
	61	error message, human text
	62	error message, human text

  The META types for the ranges 40-62 are a formality and can be safely
ignored (I'm talking about the human text portion, not the actual status
code) except for 44 which contains machine usable data.  My own server just
spits out a generic text entry for each error code (the specific error is
logged on my end---there's no need for me to send such info to the client).

  It's really the META data for response codes 10 and 11 that need to be
displayed directly to the user.  How to deal with languages here is
difficult.

  -spc