Dear All,
Concerning the point in question, may i suggest to replace the words "the registyration authority for ISI 3166-1" by the words "the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency (ISO 3166/MA)" ?
Bien cordialement.
Gérard LANG
-----Message d'origine-----
De : ltru-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces at ietf.org] De la part de ltru-request at ietf.org
Envoyé : lundi 18 mai 2009 12:46
À : ltru at ietf.org
Objet : Ltru Digest, Vol 51, Issue 22
If you have received this digest without all the individual message attachments you will need to update your digest options in your list subscription. To do so, go to
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Click the 'Unsubscribe or edit options' button, log in, and set "Get MIME or Plain Text Digests?" to MIME. You can set this option globally for all the list digests you receive at this point.
Send Ltru mailing list submissions to
ltru at ietf.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
ltru-request at ietf.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
ltru-owner at ietf.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Ltru digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. ABSOLUTELY intolerable (John Cowan)
2. Re: ABSOLUTELY intolerable (Doug Ewell)
3. Re-opening issue #40 (was: ABSOLUTELY intolerable)
(Randy Presuhn)
4. Re: ABSOLUTELY intolerable (Martin J. D?rst)
5. Issue 40: Re: Section 3.4-16 on ISO 3166 vs UN M49 RE: Ltru
Digest, Vol 50, Issue 42 (Martin J. D?rst)
6. Re: Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence in Section
2.2.9 (Martin J. D?rst)
7. Re: can't find a reference for ticket #31 (Martin J. D?rst)
8. Re: can't find a reference for ticket #31 (Kent Karlsson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 16:03:47 -0400
From: John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org>
Subject: [Ltru] ABSOLUTELY intolerable
To: Doug Ewell <doug at ewellic.org>
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru at ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20090517200347.GA27512 at mercury.ccil.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Doug Ewell scripsit:
> That means we should STOP micro-dinking the text and should STOP
> trying to dream up ways to make it even more perfect, and we should do
> as Randy has been trying to tell us: wrap this project up unless there
> is some piece of text that is wrong or ambiguous or misleading to the
> point of being ABSOLUTELY intolerable.
+1 in this case, but if the reference to the non-existent ISO 3166
Registration Authority is still in place, I consider that ABSOLUTELY intolerable.
--
Man has no body distinct from his soul, John Cowan
for that called body is a portion of the soul cowan at ccil.org
discerned by the five senses, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
the chief inlets of the soul in this age. --William Blake
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 15:36:54 -0600
From: "Doug Ewell" <doug at ewellic.org>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] ABSOLUTELY intolerable
To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru at ietf.org>
Message-ID: <3462F84856E446BEAB6352EE5D9930F4 at DGBP7M81>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
reply-type=original
John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:
> ... if the reference to the non-existent ISO 3166 Registration
> Authority is still in place, I consider that ABSOLUTELY intolerable.
That should be a quick, easy, and non-controversial correction to make.
--
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 ?
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 20:00:29 -0700
From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>
Subject: [Ltru] Re-opening issue #40 (was: ABSOLUTELY intolerable)
To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru at ietf.org>
Message-ID: <009e01c9d764$ce1d54e0$6801a8c0 at oemcomputer>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi -
As co-chair:
I promised I'd declare this "too late" unless it could be proven to cause interoperability problems. But since this is apparently so critical to interoperability that you've been reduced to shouting, we'll treat this is a request to re-open issue #40.
So, issue #40 is reopened.
I'd REALLY appreciate it if folks would include issue numbers on their subject lines. I've got other stuff to do, so I'll leave it to the document shepherd to decide when to declare consensus on this and close the issue.
Randy
----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Cowan" <cowan at ccil.org>
> To: "Doug Ewell" <doug at ewellic.org>
> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru at ietf.org>
> Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 1:03 PM
> Subject: [Ltru] ABSOLUTELY intolerable
>
> Doug Ewell scripsit:
>
> > That means we should STOP micro-dinking the text and should STOP
> > trying to dream up ways to make it even more perfect, and we should
> > do as Randy has been trying to tell us: wrap this project up unless
> > there is some piece of text that is wrong or ambiguous or misleading
> > to the point of being ABSOLUTELY intolerable.
>
> +1 in this case, but if the reference to the non-existent ISO 3166
> Registration Authority is still in place, I consider that ABSOLUTELY
> intolerable.
>
> --
> Man has no body distinct from his soul, John Cowan
> for that called body is a portion of the soul cowan at ccil.org
> discerned by the five senses, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
> the chief inlets of the soul in this age. --William Blake
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 18:17:24 +0900
From: "Martin J. D?rst" <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] ABSOLUTELY intolerable
To: John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org>
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru at ietf.org>, Doug Ewell <doug at ewellic.org>
Message-ID: <4A1127A4.4010104 at it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
(as document shepherd)
John, can you say exactly what changes to what document are necessary in your view, and which issue this relates to, or point to a mail where that has been done?
[Everybody, please make sure issue numbers don't get lost in mail threads, or get added back in when getting back to a specific issue.]
Regards, Martin.
On 2009/05/18 5:03, John Cowan wrote:
> Doug Ewell scripsit:
>
>> That means we should STOP micro-dinking the text and should STOP
>> trying to dream up ways to make it even more perfect, and we should
>> do as Randy has been trying to tell us: wrap this project up unless
>> there is some piece of text that is wrong or ambiguous or misleading
>> to the point of being ABSOLUTELY intolerable.
>
> +1 in this case, but if the reference to the non-existent ISO 3166
> Registration Authority is still in place, I consider that ABSOLUTELY
> intolerable.
>
--
#-# Martin J. D?rst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 18:46:00 +0900
From: "Martin J. D?rst" <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Subject: [Ltru] Issue 40: Re: Section 3.4-16 on ISO 3166 vs UN M49 RE:
Ltru Digest, Vol 50, Issue 42
To: John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org>
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru at ietf.org>
Message-ID: <4A112E58.1060700 at it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
[co-chair and shepherd hat on]
Okay, as Randy has reopened issue 40, and I have found the relevant mail
with the change proposal, I herewith declare that there is consensus for
the fix below (I haven't seen anybody opposing to this factual fix), and
instruct the editors to edit their text accordingly.
Regards, Martin.
P.S.: Randy, can I ask you to update
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/trac/ticket/40? You seem to be
particularly at ease with that tool, whereas I have repeatedly not been
able to get my head around it. To my defense, I can prove that I have
successfully submitted and updated bugs in Bugzilla and Redmine, but the
tool used at the IETF, or the way it's used at the IETF (or maybe it's
just me), somehow always escapes my grip (at the moment, all IETF sites
are very slow (excusable, it's still Sunday for them), and it's
impossible for me to log into the tracking system.
On 2009/05/05 4:48, John Cowan wrote:
> Randy Presuhn scripsit:
>
>> If this is supposed to be a new issue, I will declare it "too late"
>> unless it can be demonstrated to cause interoperability problems.
>
> The sentence in question is the 3rd sentence of bullet point 16 of
> Section 3.4. It says that registrants SHOULD do something which
> technically is impossible, because the registration authority they
> are asked to petition does not exist. The error is easily patched by
> s/registration authority/maintenance agency/ in 3.4-16, and leaving it
> in would be an embarrassment. Please reconsider.
>
--
#-# Martin J. D?rst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 18:53:49 +0900
From: "Martin J. D?rst" <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence in
Section 2.2.9
To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon.com>
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru at ietf.org>
Message-ID: <4A11302D.7080705 at it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
For the record, as a technical contributor, I agree with others that the
sentence in question should be removed (as it already has been).
I also don't understand Addison when he writes
"Therefore, it is useful to have some documentation explaining why this
ABNF is better."
We didn't delete the reason, the mention of the errors in the previous
ABNF is still there.
Regards, Martin.
On 2009/04/29 13:42, Phillips, Addison wrote:
> The AD points out:
>
> --
> AD review issue #4 - for details see
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg12399.html
>
> 4). In Section 2.2.9:
>
> Note well: although the 'Language-Tag' production appearing in this
> document is functionally equivalent to the one in [RFC4646], it has
> been changed to prevent certain errors in well-formedness arising
> from the old 'grandfathered' production. This version of the ABNF is
> RECOMMENDED as a replacement for the older version.
>
> (nit) I suggest deleting the last sentence, as it doesn't provide any
> useful information to a reader (as the WG wants
> draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-21bis.txt to replace RFC 4646, it is clear that
> the WG believes that the new ABNF is better). Also I don't think it uses
> RFC 2119 keyword properly.
> --
>
> I think this is not necessary. We have had, as a user community, a long-standing problem with stale references to BCP 47. We want to help ensure that implementers and standardizers use the right ABNF. It is well-known that many implementers rely excessively or even exclusively on the ABNF to determine "what is right". Therefore, it is useful to have some documentation explaining why this ABNF is better.
>
> Proposed resolution: no change
>
> Addison Phillips
> Globalization Architect -- Lab126
>
> Internationalization is not a feature.
> It is an architecture.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>
--
#-# Martin J. D?rst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 19:21:12 +0900
From: "Martin J. D?rst" <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31
To: Kent Karlsson <kent.karlsson14 at comhem.se>
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru at ietf.org>
Message-ID: <4A113698.501 at it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hello Kent,
[co-chair/shepherd head on]
Can you please make a definite and positive textual proposal for how you
think what currently is:
[ISO639-2]
International Organization for Standardization, "ISO 639-
2:1998. Codes for the representation of names of languages
-- Part 2: Alpha-3 code, first edition", 1998.
should look? I hope this will allow us to close this issue soon.
Regards, Martin.
On 2009/05/15 19:21, Kent Karlsson wrote:
> Well, the "first edition" as part of the title, which was the issue
> originally raised, is still there:
>
> [ISO639-2] International Organization for Standardization, ?ISO 639-2:1998.
> Codes for the representation of names of languages -- Part 2: Alpha-3 code,
> first edition,? 1998.
>
> The edition number isn't mentioned at all for the other ISO references.
> I think it is redundant to mention the year twice, but both drafts do so
> regularly here.
>
> (not that this is a big deal)
>
> /kent k
>
>
> Den 2009-05-15 05.08, skrev "Randy Presuhn"<randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>:
>
>> Hi -
>>
>> Before I close this ticket - is everyone happy with the
>> revised text? (ISO document titles in 4646bis)
>>
>> Randy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
--
#-# Martin J. D?rst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 12:47:16 +0200
From: Kent Karlsson <kent.karlsson14 at comhem.se>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31
To: "Martin J. D?rst " <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru at ietf.org>
Message-ID: <C6370954.C82A%kent.karlsson14 at comhem.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Quoting directly from 4645bis (version 10), where this reference is ok
(I would have put the start quote a little later, in general for the ISO
references, but now that does not matter):
[ISO639-2]
International Organization for Standardization, "ISO 639-
2:1998. Codes for the representation of names of
languages -- Part 2: Alpha-3 code", October 1998.
/kent k
Den 2009-05-18 12.21, skrev "Martin J. D?rst" <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp>:
> Hello Kent,
>
> [co-chair/shepherd head on]
>
> Can you please make a definite and positive textual proposal for how you
> think what currently is:
>
> [ISO639-2]
> International Organization for Standardization, "ISO 639-
> 2:1998. Codes for the representation of names of languages
> -- Part 2: Alpha-3 code, first edition", 1998.
>
> should look? I hope this will allow us to close this issue soon.
>
> Regards, Martin.
>
> On 2009/05/15 19:21, Kent Karlsson wrote:
>> Well, the "first edition" as part of the title, which was the issue
>> originally raised, is still there:
>>
>> [ISO639-2] International Organization for Standardization, ?ISO 639-2:1998.
>> Codes for the representation of names of languages -- Part 2: Alpha-3 code,
>> first edition,? 1998.
>>
>> The edition number isn't mentioned at all for the other ISO references.
>> I think it is redundant to mention the year twice, but both drafts do so
>> regularly here.
>>
>> (not that this is a big deal)
>>
>> /kent k
>>
>>
>> Den 2009-05-15 05.08, skrev "Randy Presuhn"<randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>:
>>
>>> Hi -
>>>
>>> Before I close this ticket - is everyone happy with the
>>> revised text? (ISO document titles in 4646bis)
>>>
>>> Randy
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
End of Ltru Digest, Vol 51, Issue 22
************************************
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.