Re: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language withMUSTlanguage in 2.2.1 (Apps #12a)

[Mark Davis <mark at macchiato.com>]

Oh, ask Mike Ksar about trying to get a response from the IETF charset registry!

But as I said, because the likelyhood of the text being invoked is so low, I'm ok with the current language, as imprecise as it is.

Mark

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 08:25, Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft.com> wrote:

From: Debbie Garside [mailto:debbie at ictmarketing.co.uk]

>>What problem is being fixed here? (I don't know that we have an existing
problem.)

> It is a matter of clarity.  If we do not state that a requester MUST first
> apply to the ISO 639 JAC there will always be the awkward cuss who comes
> along and causes a huge rumpus - we have had our fair share of these and
> sometimes it is better to dot the i's and cross the t's.  It could save us a
> lot of time in the future.

You say, "we have had our fair share of these", but in over ten years participating in IETF-languages I don't recall any serious problems having arisen of the type we're discussing.



Peter

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru