RE: [Ltru] Re: Liaison with TC37/SC2

["Debbie Garside" <debbie at ictmarketing.co.uk>]

Frank wrote: 

 
> 1 - WG sends request to "RA JAC" (i.e. somebody does this
>     on behalf of the WG, and for that part this person has
>     to be authorized to speak for the WG).
> 2 - "RA JAC" sends a reply to the WG (or not), posted here.
> 3 - WG is happy with the reply (or not), liaison sends a
>     "thanks" (and that terminates this liaison activity).
> 4 - Updated official statement integrated into 4646bis.

If only it were that simple. I think IETF-languages and LTRU would benefit
greatly from a liaison with TC37/SC2 (WG1).  Liaison would be tasked to work
in the interests of the IETF at ISO level, in particular with regard to the
updating of standards and designing of new standards. ISO 639-1 and -2 are
scheduled for update next year.  ISO 639-6 is scheduled for publication in
January 2008 with ISO 639-4 and -5 slightly sooner.  There is lots going on
at WG level that IETF should have knowledge of.  Liaison to JAC is not
helpful at all in this case as the JAC purely make decisions on new
registration requests and are not involved in the standard writing process;
which is at WG level.

Best regards

Debbie


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





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