Hello Karen, At 07:04 06/06/22, Karen_Broome at spe.sony.com wrote: >Yes, I'm still lurking. My two cents: This is way more worth than 2 cents! It is the first post in a long time that actually said more about ISO 11179 than its number and the degree to which we 'might consider' it. As a co-chair, I want encourage everybody to either express their opinions on ISO 11179 with a similar level of detail as Karen, or to stop repeating their position. As a technical contributor, Karen's arguments that ISO 11179 is for way bigger things than our language tag registry is very convincing. Unless somebody else brings up equally convincing arguments, my personal opinion is that we should not spend time on IOS 11179 as a group. Regards, Martin. >I've looked into ISO 11179 very deeply in spots as I'm actively arguing for some of its data element naming/description best practices in another group I serve. The metadata standard I work on for this group has about 2,000 data elements (not data *values* such as "en-US", but *elements* such as "RFC 3066 Language Code"). Each element must be assigned a unique, descriptive name and XML symbol. The naming and unambiguous description of elements in large standards such as this can be very complicated and benefits from the conceptual metamodel, naming guidelines, and other best practices found in ISO 11179. > >RFC 3066 does not seem to approach the scope of this work at all as far as the number of data elements it contains. It seems to me that ISO 11179 is more appropriate for registries with a larger number of metadata types -- something on the IANA scale, not just RFC 3066. > >For the record, I have not read the administrative practices section as carefully as the data element naming, metamodel, and description work. It's all good stuff, but to me it seems aimed at a registry with a greater variety of data. > >FWIW, > >Karen Broome >Sony Pictures Entertainment #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at 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.