RE: Alignment of IANA language subtag registry to ISO 639-3

From: Philippe Verdy (verdy_p@wanadoo.fr)
Date: Tue Oct 09 2007 - 00:01:54 CDT

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Alignment of IANA language subtag registry to ISO 639-3"

    Doug Ewell wrote:
    > For those who are interested in the proposed, greatly expanded Registry,
    > it is contained within a huge Internet-Draft located at:
    >
    > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.txt
    > (plain text, official version, 874 kB)
    >
    > http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-02.html
    > (HTML version, 754 kB)

    As you are the signing author of this draft, why isn't it split into two
    separate drafts:
    * this file without section 3 (that makes most of its content but is
    intended to be deleted upon publication)
    * section 3 as a draft for the updated registry itself?

    After all, its section 4 (security) has been split as well into a separate
    draft (but is also containing the draft for the procedure for the
    maintenance of the registry, referenced in section 5 about IANA
    consideration).

    May be a draft document for this update is not the correct way to publish
    this information, given that it does not follow the procedure for
    maintenance of the registry, and does not differenctiate the elements that
    are part of the current standard and not updated here, from those that are
    added, modified or deleted.

    This means that this section 3 is just describing the status of the registry
    that would be perceived after the draft update has been updated, meaning
    that it should better be automatically generated from the current database
    and a set of diffs for each proposed update, each diff being in the format
    of the procedure referenced in section 5. I see this section as a simulation
    and not even informative (or just there for illustration purpose, but then
    why do we need this to be "tentatively" complete?)



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 09 2007 - 00:05:42 CDT