Mark Davis wrote:
I don't see why that is necessary. The registry has the tag extlang, which tells us that knn is Konkani as an individual language. We hardly need a paranthetical to do that, because we have extlang....I can tell that kok is Konkani as a macrolanguage simply by the fact that it is the prefix of some extlang (such as knn) in the repository.
OK, then, once and for all:Are we going to adhere to a rule that all Description fields must match the source standards exactly, or are we not?
We cannot continue to claim we follow this rule, constrain ourselves by it, and then not follow it, or vice versa. We must make a decision one way or the other and stick to it.
I will wait until one of the co-chairs has declared a rough consensus on this issue before releasing draft-4645bis-01.
-- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ 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.