Subject: Re: [Ltru] going back to the roots to find a solution to "zh"

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 23:47:18 -0600

Mark Davis <mark dot davis at icu dash project dot org> wrote:

> [Our best course of action for compatibility and interoperability
> would be to deprecate cmn, arb, and the few others in that section,
> but I doubt that we could get consensus on that, so I'd never brought
> it up.]

You might be able to get "rough consensus," as with extlang, but unless
there were some assurance that the list of "the few others" -- the tough
cases, not cmn and arb -- was correct, complete, and defensible, you'd
have some pretty strong opposition.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Arvada, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

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