Re: [Ltru] 2.2.4: codes listed as eligible for registration in 4645

["Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon.com>]

It is still valid. The reference in question in RFC 4645 is:

--
4. Omitted Code Elements

   The following code elements from [UN_M.49] were not associated with
   [ISO3166-1] alpha-2 code elements.  Consequently, they were not
   assigned as subtags in the initial Language Subtag Registry, but were
   valid candidates for registration as region subtags, using the
   process in [RFC4646]:

      830   Channel Islands
      831   Guernsey
      832   Jersey
      833   Isle of Man

   The last three became ineligible for registration in April, 2006,
   when the [ISO3166-1] code elements GG, JE, and IM were assigned as
   region subtags.
--

Thus, '830' is still valid for registration. At one time, the rules were even more permissive (hence this text). Incidentally, this reference is why RFC 4645 is still a normative reference in draft-4646bis.

Addison

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ltru-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces at ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Peter Constable
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 11:55 AM
> To: LTRU Working Group
> Subject: [Ltru] 2.2.4: codes listed as eligible for registration in
> 4645
>
> Draft 16 currently has this wording:
>
> ------------
> E. UN numeric codes and ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes for countries or
> areas listed as eligible for registration in [RFC4645] but not
> presently registered MAY be entered into the IANA registry via the
> process described in Section 3.5 (Registration Procedure for
> Subtags). Once registered, these codes MAY be used to form language
> tags.
> ------------
>
> The intended reference isn't clear: I don't see a M.46 or 3166-1
> codes listed in 4645 as eligible for registration. (The closest I
> see are a set of M.49 codes that are *in*eligible for registration.)
> Is this paragraph an anachronism that is no longer needed? If it
> still has a useful purpose, then it might help to clear up the
> wording.
>
>
>
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru