Subject: [Ltru] Can we live with Draft 15?

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:36:45 -0700

At this point, I think it would be best to just find out just a thumbs up or
thumbs down on the following question:

Can you live with draft 15 as the basis* for going forward?

For my part, the answer is: yes

Mark

==========

* subject to some further wordsmithing, refining Scope, etc.
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:33:25 +0200

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 02:36:45PM -0700,
 Mark Davis <[email-masked]> wrote 

> Can you live with draft 15 as the basis* for going forward?

Allow me first to summary what I understood of extlangs in -15. This
summary is here to help me, but if others find it useful, great (and
if I misunderstood, please open fire immediately):

********************************

Some (cherry-picked) encompassed languages will have a 'Type: extlang'
entry in the LSR, together with a 'Type: language' entry for the same
subtag.

If qzz is registered that way, with a 'Prefix: qa', both qa-qzz and
qzz are valid tags but the latter is the recommended form (the former
being deprecated at birth).

Macrolanguage information is stored in the registry but there is no
simple relationship between macrolanguages and extlangs.

********************************

If so, yes, I can live with it.