[Ltru] Re: Preferred-Value added to registry

["Doug Ewell" <dewell at adelphia.net>]

Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote:

> Okay, I found a stupid bug in my quick and dirty script, now
> it outputs the comments shown below, no problems, bye, Frank
>
> IN (2004-07-06) => ID (1989-01-01)
> IW (2004-07-06) => HE (1989-01-01)
> JI (2004-07-06) => YI (1989-01-01)
> JW (2005-01-17) => JV (2001-08-13)
> SH (2004-07-06) => ?? (2000-02-18)
> -BU (2004-07-06) => -MM (1989-12-05)
> -DD (2004-07-06) => -DE (1990-10-30)
> -FX (2004-07-06) => -FR (1997-07-14)
> -NT (2004-07-06) => ??? (1993-07-12)
> -SU (2004-07-06) => ??? (1992-08-30)
> -TP (2004-07-06) => -TL (2002-11-15)
> -YD (2004-07-06) => -YE (1990-08-14)
> -YU (2005-01-01) => -CS (2003-07-23)
> -ZR (2004-07-06) => -CD (1997-07-14)
> [9]57 (sub)tags in 4954 lines, 249 xrefs okay

Is this a complaint that the "Added" date of the deprecated subtags
comes after their "Deprecated" date?

"Added" dates are the date the subtag was added to the LTRU registry
(except for grandfathered and redundant whole-tags, which bear the date
the tag was added to the RFC 1766/3066 tag registry).  These dates will
probably all be moved forward to Date B.

"Deprecated" dates, for those subtags that have them in the initial
registry, are the date the subtag was deprecated in the core ISO
standard.  Subtags deprecated after Date B will bear that date.

Mismatches between these two concepts are not considered errors.

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/



_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru