Re: [Ltru] RFC 4646 and ISO TC46

[LB <lbleriot at gmail.com>]

I received a copy of the response from the author. I can see that this
is a difficulty of some Anglo-Saxon (United Kingdom, Ireland, US) to
remove themselves from the outdated theories of Chomsky. ISO TC46 has
in fact expressed its disinterest in their proposal to extend the same
mistake with ISO. The important point now is to work together on the
multilinguisrtics discipline (multiple languages parallel usage and
support) to find solutions to maintain interoperability of the IANA
registry with all the other works in line with the WSIS and the
Multilingual Internet.
Sincerely

2008/3/8, Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>:
> Hi -
>
>  > From: "Nicolas Krebs" <nicolas1.krebs3 at netcourrier.com>
>  > To: <ltru at ietf.org>
>  > Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 10:30 AM
>  > Subject: [Ltru] RFC 4646 and ISO TC46
>
> >
>  > (For the records and the archives.)
>  >
>  > Someone wrote in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.idn/1676
>  > that some part of RFC 4646 has been "defeated at ISO TC46".
>  > Is this true?
>
>
> The statement makes no sense.  RFC 4646 is an IETF BCP, not an
>  ISO document.  Due to his persistent disruptive misbehavior,  and
>  pursuant to RFC 3683, the posting privileges of author of that
>  article were revoked in this WG about two years ago.  I strongly
>  suggest not bringing his disinformation onto this list, even by
>  reference.
>
>  Randy
>  ltru co-chair
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ltru mailing list
>  Ltru at ietf.org
>  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>


-- 
LB
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru