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

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

(editor hat)

DONE

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Constable [mailto:petercon at microsoft.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 11:49 PM
> To: Phillips, Addison; LTRU Working Group
> Subject: RE: 2.2.4: codes listed as eligible for registration in
> 4645
>
> Can I suggest, then, that you provide a more specific reference:
> "... listed as eligible for registration in Section 4 of [RFC
> 4645]..."
>
>
> Peter
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Phillips, Addison [mailto:addison at amazon.com]
> > Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 3:19 PM
> > To: Peter Constable; LTRU Working Group
> > Subject: RE: 2.2.4: codes listed as eligible for registration in
> 4645
> >
> > 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