Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft dot com> wrote:
This is one of the cases that I asked the JAC to review before ISO 639-3 was published but that they did not review in time. It still hasn't been reviewed. If it is problematic for RFC 4645bis, we should be able to request some expedited action to resolve it.
Depends on how you define "problematic." I did have to make a special case to handle it, beyond the automated merging of the 639-3 and 639-5 code lists and the existing Registry. But there are already other special cases, like changing some of the existing Preferred-Values to get rid of chains, and changing grandfathered tags to redundant as needed. I suppose these could be automated too, but then again, so could this.
If you're thinking about knocking on the JAC's door, you might inquire when the 639-5 site is going to be available, so we can find out about updates and find out whether they've fixed problems like this one and 'car'. I heard that site was supposed to be ready by September.
-- Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://www.ewellic.org http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ _______________________________________________ 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.