Return-Path: Received: from murder ([unix socket]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Cyrus v2.2.8-Mandrake-RPM-2.2.8-4.2.101mdk) with LMTPA; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:12:39 +0200 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8462861B55 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:12:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 27124-04 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:12:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1614861B49 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:12:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DLM7W-0007Jl-6G; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 10:12:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DLM7U-0007IT-Jp for ltru@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 10:12:00 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA02346 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 10:11:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [63.247.76.195] (helo=montage.altserver.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DLMGw-0001of-Ik for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 10:21:47 -0400 Received: from lns-p19-8-idf-82-249-21-108.adsl.proxad.net ([82.249.21.108] helo=jfc.afrac.org) by montage.altserver.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1DLM7H-00006w-Ad for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 07:11:47 -0700 Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050412154024.06d1ceb0@mail.jefsey.com> X-Sender: jefsey+jefsey.com@mail.jefsey.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 15:48:21 +0200 To: "ltru Working Group" From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Is there a consensus ? (was: Comment: use VU for Vanuatu) In-Reply-To: <012501c53f25$de3e6ca0$030aa8c0@DEWELL> References: <20050411124409.TWX2135.mta2.adelphia.net@megatron.ietf.org> <012501c53f25$de3e6ca0$030aa8c0@DEWELL> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - montage.altserver.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jefsey.com X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@lists.ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at alvestrand.no On 08:07 12/04/2005, Doug Ewell said: >I fully support the proposition that I have described in the two >paragraphs above. I am not sure you described any position. You just quoted the Charter and started asking yourself some questions ? you say "In my opinion, the potential conflicts and confusion of this approach will be less than if subtags are allowed to change in meaning as a result of changes in ISO standards.". Why not to consider that people/users/real languages come before both subtags _and_ standards. And are more stable and real than their descriptions? jfc _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru