|
Hi! +1 for Martin Duerst's decision to close Issue #59-- although I liked both Mark's and Debbie's suggestions. (For your reference, Mark suggested: "proposals rejected by ISO 639/ RA- JAC MUST be closely scrutinized by the Language Subtag Reviewer before they are registered with IANA" Debbie suggested that anyone wishing to register a subtag not registered with ISO 639 supply evidence that he/she attempted first to register the subtag with ISO 639. However I am happy with the current text [which is essentially requiring what Debbie says should be required, although it does not spell out that requestors of language subtags must produce evidence of attempted registration; I assume that that goes unsaid].) I tried to find previous discussion of ISO-639 and its relationship to the registry. There was little--I found one comment by Randy in a 2008 thread; see: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg11861.html Here is Randy's comment: "As co-chair: Generating substantial updates to 639-5 would have gone well beyond the scope of the ltru working group. Randy" In general there seems to have been consensus for going to ISO 639 first with a request for a language subtag. Best, C. E. Whitehead cewcathar at hotmail.com |
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.