run.language discrepancy between spec and schema

[Michael Fanning <Michael.Fanning@microsoft.com>]

Larry and I are (rather desperately) trying to button down the eballot doc. We’ve found a difference between the spec and the schema that neither of us can recall sufficient detail on to resolve. Anyone else remember anything? Absent inputs, we’re favoring the use of ISO 639-1 and ISO 3166-1 for the reason that this data appears sufficient for string mgmt. and it is a non-breaking change to expand to RFC5646 (but a breaking change to move in the other direction).

 

Michael

 

The spec mandates RFC5646 to populate run.language. The schema specifies that this property is constrained to a proper subset of RFC5646, consisting of an ISO 639-1 country code and an optional ISO 3166-1 region code.

Larry and I can't locate any history that helps us figure out how this discrepancy materialized. The RFC5646 requirement is long-standing (in fact, dates back to SARIF v1). The most likely scenarios are that we either changed the requirement and failed to update the spec. Or that we updated the schema speculatively in the SDK and someone made a successful case against the change in TC discussion.

Does anyone recall the history on this? @kupsch?

 

 

https://github.com/oasis-tcs/sarif-spec/issues/402