Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6

["Debbie Garside" <debbie at ictmarketing.co.uk>]

Whilst I can see that the process for including ISO 639-3 and updating
RFC4646 has been long and arduous and people are pretty tired, I believe
there will be a need for inclusion of ISO 639-6 data at some point in the
future - particularly when end users request a language tag on
IETF-Languages that is facilitated within the ISO 639-6 code once published.
This begs the question, who is ultimately going to make the decision to
ignore an ISO 639 standard?

The ISO 639-6 data is hierarchical in nature, goes to a level of granularity
that will facilitate virtually any requirement and also differentiates
between written and spoken language variations - something that will be
extremely useful for metadata registries within archive industries as well
as tagging for the visually impaired, deaf and hard of hearing.

That said, I don't believe now is the correct time to re-charter for the
purposes of including ISO 639-6 data. I don't think I am ready for this - I
may be in 6-12 months. 

I do, however, think it would be a good idea to keep this list open for
general discussions and if this proves the case I will inform the list as
and when I consider ISO 639-6 data sufficiently ready for incorporation.
Whether you decide to re-charter at that point (or at any other time) is up
to you.

Best regards

Debbie Garside
Editor ISO FDIS 639-6

-----Original Message-----
From: ltru-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Randy Presuhn
Sent: 13 July 2009 18:36
To: LTRU Working Group
Subject: Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

I, too, oppose re-chartering ltru at this time.
The additions made by the documents recently approved
take us well past the point of diminishing returns
in terms of language coverage.

What that might convince me that re-chartering was needed
would be the appearance large quantities of data in large
numbers of languages in use by substantial speech communities
not covered by the recent updates, and not adequately handled
by the registration procedures.  I don't think that's going to
happen anytime in the foreseeable future.

Randy  

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



Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 15/05/2009
06:16
 

Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 15/05/2009
06:16