> > If it's an addition to 639-1, then either it will already have been in > 639-2, or it is being added to both simultaneously, and it would get > announced together. It if is a new addition to 639-3, then likely it is > not something that would make it into 639-1. In general, I expect new > additions to 639-1 to be pretty rare. Um... what about my contention that parts 2 and 3 are synchronized? I assume that an addition to 639-2 would automatically also be added to 639-3, no? > > I've suggested before thFrom ltru-bounces at ietf.org Sat May 31 13:12:53 2008 Return-Path: <ltru-bounces at ietf.org> X-Original-To: ltru-archive at megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-ltru-archive at core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5953A6A6D; Sat, 31 May 2008 13:12:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: ltru at core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ltru at core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A29543A6ABA for <ltru at core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 May 2008 13:12:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.572 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kMs5OBoxSjW3 for <ltru at core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 May 2008 13:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-fw-2101.amazon.com (smtp-fw-2101.amazon.com [72.21.196.25]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA1833A6A6D for <ltru at ietf.org>; Sat, 31 May 2008 13:12:51 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,459,1199664000"; d="scan'208";a="56365806" Received: from smtp-in-1105.vdc.amazon.com ([10.140.9.24]) by smtp-border-fw-out-2101.iad2.amazon.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 31 May 2008 20:12:51 +0000 Received: from ex-hub-4102.ant.amazon.com (ex-hub-4102.ant.amazon.com [10.248.163.23]) by smtp-in-1105.vdc.amazon.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m4VKCoKP006338 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sat, 31 May 2008 20:12:51 GMT Received: from ex-pub-4102.ant.amazon.com (10.248.180.20) by ex-hub-4102.ant.amazon.com (10.248.163.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.263.0; Sat, 31 May 2008 13:12:50 -0700 Received: from EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com ([10.248.163.28]) by ex-pub-4102.ant.amazon.com ([10.248.180.20]) with mapi; Sat, 31 May 2008 13:12:35 -0700 From: "Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon.com> To: Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft.com>, LTRU Working Group <ltru at ietf.org> Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 13:12:46 -0700 Thread-Topic: [Ltru] ISO 639 language code addition rules... Thread-Index: AcjDS24hn+LOpE9URRyTOcfnHTF4lwACEx8AAAFmhZA= Message-ID: <4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA013A910667 at EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com> References: <mailman.2253.1212256019.5108.ltru at ietf.org> <001201c8c34b$668bca60$e6f5e547 at DGBP7M81> <DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579563335441B5 at NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> In-Reply-To: <DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579563335441B5 at NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Ltru] ISO 639 language code addition rules... X-BeenThere: ltru at ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru> List-Post: <mailto:ltru at ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request at ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ltru-bounces at ietf.org Errors-To: ltru-bounces at ietf.org > > If it's an addition to 639-1, then either it will already have been in > 639-2, or it is being added to both simultaneously, and it would get > announced together. It if is a new addition to 639-3, then likely it is > not something that would make it into 639-1. In general, I expect new > additions to 639-1 to be pretty rare. Um... what about my contention that parts 2 and 3 are synchronized? I assume that an addition to 639-2 would automatically also be added to 639-3, no? > > I've suggested before that we coat we could decide that we will never again > register something from 639-1. That would eliminate these concerns > entirely. > It seems unlikely that we'll discover that many unknown languages that merit a 639-1 code, so this sounds sensible, as any future additions to 639-1 will probably be covered by the rule prohibiting assignments that match existing three letter codes. Addison _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru uld decide that we will never again > register something from 639-1. That would eliminate these concerns > entirely. > It seems unlikely that we'll discover that many unknown languages that merit a 639-1 code, so this sounds sensible, as any future additions to 639-1 will probably be covered by the rule prohibiting assignments that match existing three letter codes. Addison _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www.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.