Frank, if you feel that vetting of entities coded in ISO standards is so essential, why don't you start with 639-1 and 639-2 since those are far more tractable sets and would be part of vetting 639-3 anyway. (My point isn't to actually get you to do that but rather to point out you're being somewhat arbitrary here.) Personally, I agree with Doug: the job of LTRU is to work on 4646bis, not to sift through 639-3 and cherry pick. It is *NOT* the role of LTRU to vet registration requests for variant or 5..8 language subtags; that the job of ietf-languages. Peter -----Original Message----- From: Frank Ellermann [mailto:nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de] > That is pure cherry-picking You could say the same about variant or alpha 5..8 language registrations, somebody has to do the vetting. Otherwise all in <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Artistic_languages> could get subtags. _______________________________________________ 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.