> Mark Davis <mark dot davis at icu dash project dot org> wrote on > ietf-languages: > > The only reason it does have to do with LTRU is that we are > > considering adding 639-3, and 639-3 lists "Alemanic" as the *sole* > > name for gsw, which is clearly incorrect. Thus it raises > the issue of > > whether to take the 639-3 names wholesale, or allow corrections. Further to my recent email. I would recommend that text be incorporated within RFC4646bis stating that any problems with reference names/entities gleaned from underlying ISO standards should be referred to the appropriate authority for clarification/correction. Further, the comment field can clarify the entity within the registry until such time as the issue is resolved; if indeed it is. Best regards Debbie Debbie Garside Managing Director GeoLang Ltd Corner House Barn Street Haverfordwest Pembrokeshire SA61 1BW Wales UK Tel: 0044 1437 766441 Web: http://www.geolang.com _______________________________________________ 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.