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

["Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>]

Hi -

> From: "Alexey Melnikov" <alexey.melnikov at isode.com>
> To: <ltru at ietf.org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:58 PM
> Subject: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUSTlanguage in 2.2.1 (Apps #12a)
>
> I am not entirely happy with the resolution "wantfix" for this one, as 
> this is a typical case of what can bring a DISCUSS from other IESG members.
> So let me try to suggest a specific text.
> 
> OLD:
> At the time this document was created, there were no examples of
> this kind of subtag and future registrations of this type are
> discouraged: primary languages are strongly RECOMMENDED for
>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> registration with ISO 639, and proposals rejected by ISO 639/ RA-
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> JAC will be closely scrutinized by the Language Subtag Reviewer
> before they are registered with IANA.
> 
> NEW:
> At the time this document was created, there were no examples of
> this kind of subtag and future registrations of this type are
> discouraged: an attempt to register a primary language MUST be
>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> made to ISO 639, and proposals rejected by ISO 639/ RA-
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> JAC will be closely scrutinized by the Language Subtag Reviewer
> before they are registered with IANA.
> 
> 
> I.e. the discussion about what the Language Tag Reviewer is going to do 
> is not the point of this issue.

As a technical contributor...

As long as the understanding is that we don't need to go back and
wordsmith to cover the cases of indefinite delay, non-response, or
tweaks to the scope of what is covered by the registration in ISO-land,
I'd be OK with Alex's proposed text.

Randy