[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Ltru] Re: editorial nits in initial registry draft -01



Are we actually going to publish the -initial draft as an RFC?
I seem to remember that at one point, the idea was to not do
that, because by the time the RFC would be published, it would
already be out of date. In that scenario, we planned to move
-initial through (WG and IETF) last call and IESG approval,
but then go directly to IANA and no further in the RFC process.
If I'm out of sync here, I'm sorry.

Regards,    Martin.

At 04:21 05/07/11, Doug Ewell wrote:
>Addison Phillips <addison dot phillips at quest dot com> wrote:
>
>> Why not say:
>>
>> "This memo defines the initial contents of the Language Subtag
>> Registry for use in forming tags for the identification of languages."
>>
>> The introduction can say where draft-registry is at and all that.
>
>Why not, indeed?  Makes sense to me.  I made that change, and <!-- left
>the original --> in case of dispute.
>
>--
>Doug Ewell
>Fullerton, California
>http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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




Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.