Subject: [Ltru] Deprecated (was: Re: 3066ter encompassed languages)

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 19:17:51 -0700

John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:

> I would not object to a new "discouraged" status intermediate between 
> deprecated and encouraged.

"Deprecated" in RFC 4646 is already a rather gentle form of 
discouragement.  It doesn't seem quite as much of an offense in RFC 4646 
to create a deprecated tag like "iw" as it is in Unicode to use a 
character like U+0340.

Note that Unicode did create a de-facto "strongly discouraged" status 
for the Plane 14 tag characters, slightly below full Deprecated status 
(which is also defined using the words "strongly discouraged").

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California, USA
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
RFC 4645  •  UTN #14

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

---

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 19:58:54 -0700

Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring dot com> wrote:

> Based on how the last round went, I think the WG's decision to use an 
> internet draft was correct.
>
> I think the WG's decision to publish to send that material through the 
> RFC publication process was also good, inasmuch as it did elicit 
> useful comments, and gave us the requisite paper trail to deal with 
> real or imagined procedural problems.

Fair enough, then.  But I don't want to hear any complaints from others 
that an 800-plus-page I-D is too long or unwieldy, or that writing one 
is an exercise in egotism or self-aggrandizement (I don't remember who 
said that last time).

> I think the final decision to elide the interesting parts was perhaps 
> unfortunate, but also understandable, given the onslaught the IETF has 
> been suffering.

Actually I thought that had been the plan for many months.  We knew the 
real Registry would see many updates and didn't want people to use the 
initial-registry snapshot as a substitute.