RE: [Ltru] IANA ISO 3166 related Registries

["Addison Phillips" <addison.phillips at quest.com>]

What, pray tell, has this got to do with language tags?

Addison

Addison P. Phillips
Globalization Architect, Quest Software
Chair, W3C Internationalization Core Working Group

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ltru-bounces at lists.ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces at lists.ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of r&d afrac
> Sent: den 3 juli 2005 08:16
> To: Randy Presuhn; ltru at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] IANA ISO 3166 related Registries
> 
> At 06:17 03/07/2005, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> > > The position adopted by the USA concerning the control of the root
> file
> >
> >What position in what forum are you talking about?
> 
> Sorry, due to its importance I expected this information was known to
> everyone. I sent the URL in another mail.
> 
> >Is this in conjunction with your http://intlnet.org/eadmin.htm project?
> >Who would be the liaison contact for the IETF?
> 
> as previously explained ICANN published the ICP-3 document. IETF
> disregarded the call. Intlnet carried this experimentation along with the
> ICANN guidlines (named dot-root). This permitted to identify both the
> needs
> (as the USA do today) and ways to address them. We incorporated AFRAC to
> explore the solutions we identified. The architectural stability of the
> world digital ecosystem and the end to end principle call for (at least)
> the national distribution of the reference sources (IANA): Common
> Refeference Centers. The NICSO has the mission to advise Govs, ccTLDs and
> National Internet Communities over the transition.
> 
> > > consensus is that every IANA Registry using ISO 3166 codes will be
> from now
> >
> >The consensus of whom?
> 
> The people I polled who are involved in the study/project of a CRC
> projects
> interested in the AFRAC work.
> 
> > > on deemed representing an US position, unless it is transferred to the
> > > ICANN IANA zone, on such case the authority should be the GAC. The
> >
> >The logic of how the use of an ISO international standard could be
> construed
> >as representing a US position completely eludes me.
> 
> Read the US Statement of Principles.
> 
> > > consensus is that generally the US point of view on local culture does
> bear
> >
> >I'm curious to learn what this "US point of view on local culture" is
> >and where (and by whom) this weighty pronouncement was made.
> 
> the many who would like to know it!
> 
> 
> > > enough weight to be worth the continuation of the effort engaged since
> > > December. Also it is that priority will be given to the root files and
> that
> > > any organisation proposing a distributed IANA copy will support the
> langtag
> > > Registry decided by its own Culture Ministry.
> >
> >I don't think the US even has a Culture Ministry.
> 
> This is precisely the problem :-)
> 
> >If there is one, it goes by some other name and keeps a *very* low
> profile.
> 
> You may know that in many countries of the world, this Ministry is a key
> one. What is really a problem is that ietf-languages may consider deciding
> anything about languages and countries without involving these Ministries.
> And that this Draft does not consider them.
> 
> > > It is also agreed that the US position should be read as a support of
> the
> >
> >Agreed by whom?
> 
> By some who have the capacity to do it and that the US position
> acknowledges as in charge, as far as it has been quickly discussed
> evaluated. There is no reason to think ohers would see it differently:
> they
> share the same interests as the US Governments, within the frame of their
> own culture and policies. Obviously now the international community is to
> organise its intergovernance.
> 
> With the hope that this WG will cease to be one of its problem.  The USA
> considered their critical infrastructure but also the American way of life
> (http://whitehouse.gov/pcipb) . Other countries consider also the same
> their language and culture. This WG will obviously not be an international
> problem, but certainly its Registry will be a reason for national
> alternative-IANA, based on the international community solutions (ISO).
> 
> jfc
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru at lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru


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