"Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon dot com> wrote:
The problem here is as I expressed previously? the LSR can reject these requests---it is what having an expert reviewer is *for*. But requiring a rejection of something rejected by ISO 639 is tantamount to saying you can?t register any such subtags. We might was well take the mechanism away altogether.
I agree, and think we are getting carried away with making sure nothing can ever possibly, imaginably go wrong in corner cases that have never caused any problems for us or ietf-languages before.
I would propose a slight alteration of Alexey?s text to ensure we do this right:--At the time this document was created, there were no examples of this kind of subtag. Future registrations of this type are discouraged: an attempt to register any new proposed primary language MUST be made with ISO 639. Proposals rejected by ISO 639/ RA-JAC are unlikely to meet the criteria for primary language subtags and are thus unlikely to be registered.--
I am quite happy with Addison's proposed text. It leaves open the possibility of registering these things; to shut the door on them altogether would be a technical change. It gets rid of inappropriate wording (I never liked "frowned upon" either). Let's ship it, please.
-- 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.