Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050703204019.0477c180@mail.afrac.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 03:13:19 +0200
To: "Addison Phillips" <addison.phillips@quest.com>
From: r&d afrac <rd@afrac.org>
Subject: RE: [Ltru] IANA ISO 3166 related Registries
In-Reply-To: <634978A7DF025A40BFEF33EB191E13BC0C014531@irvmbxw01.quest.c
 om>
References: <634978A7DF025A40BFEF33EB191E13BC0C014531@irvmbxw01.quest.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: ltru@ietf.org
Precedence: list
Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org

On 19:29 03/07/2005, Addison Phillips said:
>What, pray tell, has this got to do with language tags?

This is clear enough. The US Statement changes the nature of the IANA from 
a global reference center into a national reference center, like AFRAC will 
be one and most probably each country will soon experiment one. This is not 
because an RFC says this or that, or because ietf-languages will adopt a 
langtag or not, that it will translate into these Registries. This will be 
because the reference centers intergovernance will adhere to your 
proposition or to a registration.

1. obviously there is work ahead to get this reference centers operational. 
My fear was that you would create additional confusion before the ISO 
Varsaw meeting and the USA would announce their new strategy. And this way 
you would delay our effort.
2. now if you want langtags to be supported by the Internet Registry 
System, you will have to convince us, not only the IESG.

To convince us (whatever the way this intergovernance will formed in coming 
months) you will have IMHO to demonstrate:

1. your project is not contentious. This means that its Registry is 
controled in a way acceptable to all. The rule which will prevail is 
subsidiarity: the one who is concerned is the one who decides: experts 
advise, locals decide. A good transition rule is that Registries using ISO 
3166 or/and ISO 639 codes (a) becomes part of the name and numbers ICANN 
reserved area (RFC 2860) and be under GAC final control (b) to impose them 
to harmonize with ISO 11179 and with the results on distributed CRCs 
experimentation.

2. your project is to be a network project. This means that it should be 
consistent in every relational layers and core services - including DNS, 
OPES, etc. I explained what it means as far as AFRAC is concerned.
1. the langtag identifies a relational channel protocol. This means that it 
defines a protocol permitting person to person interintelligibility.
2. this means that a dysimetrical receiving (concepts)/sending(values) ends 
negotiation using language, mode and cultural environment (what documents 
the protocol), referent (what refers to the channel) and context (what 
refers to the relations) elements.
3. anyone can register any non conflicting form of langtag in any format. 
The need is for end to end/person to person relation 
establishment/authentication. Formats, like yours, can stabilise or even 
aquire a defacto leadership or monopoly if they are adequate to usage.

Is that clear?
jfc


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru