Martin Duerst wrote: > One theory would be that 639-3 is already so comprehensive > that updates will be very rare. It comes without Suppress-Scripts. If the review list is unable to deal with this issue it has to be prepared by the WG for 639-3 languages where that's possible (= "obvious"). That might be a point for the updated Charter. > I have noted myself that it's not yet listed as "In State: > RFC Ed Queue" in the IETF tracker, although it's already in > the RFC Editor Queue. I'll find out who's fault that is. http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/ietf/rfc/hist.cgi?draft=draft-ietf-ltru-matching says it entered the queue at 2006-07-24 after one day in limbo. In theory a third party like the W3C could ask the IESG to accelerate the publication of BCP 47, because they want to fix their references in say XHTML modularization 1.1. I think it was our fault when we didn't see the implications of an RFC editor note causing a "blocked waiting for 'matching'" - the German word for this could be "Sollbruchstelle". The history tool shows this as "20060725 was in REF-EXT since 20060119 (187 days)" or as "20060726 was in MISSREF*R since 20060120 (187 days)". Before that it took 43 days to create the new IANA registry. Frank _______________________________________________ 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.