Subject: [Ltru] Re: Preparing ourselves for IETF Last Call

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 10:51:59 -0800

Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft dot com> wrote:

> I'll say it yet again: excluding "UK" is consistent with section 3.4; 
> to wit:
>
>  "8.   Codes assigned by ISO 639, ISO 15924, and ISO 3166 that do not
>        conflict with existing subtags of the associated type and whose
>        meaning is **not the same as an existing subtag of the same
>        type** are entered into the IANA registry as new records."

Strictly speaking, that's a rule for ongoing maintenance of the LSR to 
keep up with changes to the ISO standards.  If ISO 3166/MA assigned "UK" 
tomorrow, for example, this rule says the Reviewer would not add it as a 
subtag.

Adding the exceptionally reserved code elements is actually a matter of 
RFC 4645bis bulk reloading of the Registry, which is not quite the same 
thing.  For example, in RFC 4645 we added (and pre-deprecated) the 
duplicate language subtags "in" and "iw" and "ji", on the basis that 
they were part of the 1988 ISO 639 standard referenced by RFCs 1766 and 
3066, even though these code elements were withdrawn from ISO 639 well 
before RFC 1766 was written.

Still, if we want to point to Section 3.4, rule 8 as our rationale for 
not adding "UK" in the bulk update, that's a good thing: it means we are 
following a rule in RFC 4646, not making up the rules as we go along, 
which is my concern.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://home.roadrunner.com/~dewell
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

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

---

From: Peter Constable <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 08:54:37 -0800

> From: Doug Ewell [mailto:[email-masked]]

> thing.

I understand that this is not the same. But the principles adopted for dealing with changes to underlying ISO standards are driven by conditions we want to hold in the LSR, and we want those conditions to hold either when the ISO standards change or when we re-load the registry.

Peter