Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: Question

From: "Addison Phillips" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 23:34:53 -0800

Ack. What John said, except add:

UN M.49 codes for regions for which no ISO code has ever been assigned.

Addison P. Phillips
Globalization Architect, Quest Software
Chair, W3C Internationalization Core Working Group

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
> Behalf Of John Cowan
> Sent: jeudi 24 mars 2005 23:27
> To: Doug Ewell
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Question
> 
> Here's my take on Doug Ewell's question.  "Date A" means 1995-03-01,
> the publication date of RFC 1766.  "Date B" means the publication date
> of the new BCP that replaces RFC 3066.  These dates could be changed
> without affecting my judgments very much.
> 
> > QUESTION:  Should the draft implement region-code stability: (a) by
> > preserving all assigned ISO 3166 codes with their original meaning,
> 
> ISO codes terminated before Date A and not reassigned have never been
> valid in 1766 or 3066 langtags, and should not be permitted.
> 
> ISO codes terminated after Date A and not reassigned before Date B
> should be permitted and marked as deprecated, with the nearest equivalent
> documented in the registry.
> 
> ISO codes in effect as of Date B, whether or not they were once assigned
> to a different meaning, should be permitted in their meaning as of Date B.
> 
> > except those that have already been reassigned, and using UN numeric
> > codes in the case of future reassignments;
> 
> UN codes that encode countries should only be allowed in the case of
> the reassignment of an ISO 3166-1 code after Date B.
> 
> UN codes that encode regions of the world should be permitted.
> 
> > (b) by allowing UN codes in parallel with ISO 3166 codes, as a preferred
> > alternative, and deprecating the ISO codes; or (c) same as (b), but
> > NOT deprecating the ISO codes?
> 
> Having two codes for the same thing is always a bad idea and should not
> be allowed unless a code reassignment after Date A but before Date B
> makes it necessary.
> 
> --
> After fixing the Y2K bug in an application:     John Cowan
>         WELCOME TO <censored>                   [email-masked]
>         DATE: MONDAK, JANUARK 1, 1900           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru