Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: Approval of two ltru documents

From: "Addison Phillips" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:51:16 -0800

> 
> Both will become BCP 47.  I've already confirmed with the RFC Editor that
> one or the other can be obsoleted later on independently of the other if
> needed.

That's kind of weird, but as long as the linkage is dissolved (when it makes sense to be dissolved) I'm happy.

Addison

Addison P. Phillips
Globalization Architect, Quest Software

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture. 

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

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 07:22:31 +0100

Addison Phillips wrote:

> That's kind of weird

You're not forced to accept it.  Late updates via "RfC editor
notes" are a weak point in the process.  They could also add
it as an "IESG note" if you don't like it.

                            Bye, Frank

---

From: Martin Duerst <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:35:55 +0900

>makes sense to be dissolved) I'm happy.

That seems extremely easy to do. The RFC Editor just updates
the list of BCP->RFC correspondences.
(see http://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp-index.html). So I don't
think there is any problem at all.

Let's concentrate on the matching draft itself.

Regards,   Martin.