Debbie Garside <debbie at ictmarketing dot co dot uk> wrote:
--- In order for a primary language subtag request to be considered for registration within the Language Subtag Registry, the requester MUST supply evidence that they have previously applied to the ISO 639 JAC to encode the entity and that the request has been rejected.---
I guess the evidence would be in the form of an e-mail trail.
I do see the need to go to ISO 639 JAC first. We really do not want to register primary language subtags and then find that after the event the ISO 639 JAC allocate their own subtag - which means ours would have to be deprecated.
This is a good point. But I can imagine JAC turning down a request at first, when presented by an individual with a few Web references (who proceeds to persuade the Reviewer to register it), and then subsequently approving a later request for the same entity when presented by a national standards body citing more "serious" references. That would cause ietf-languages to have to deprecate the primary language subtag anyway. There is already considerable churn in ISO 639-3, certainly more than we've seen with the other parts (although perhaps commensurate with the difference in scope).
I wouldn't fight hard against making this change, I just didn't see it as necessary.
I do feel, as others do, that it is highly unlikely that ietf-languages and the Reviewer will ever approve a non-639 primary language subtag, either one that has not been presented to 639 or one that has been rejected.
-- 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
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.