An attempt at closure

[Jon Hanna]

Right, I don't want yet another thread that rehashes the argument. If anyone has a substantial objection to this lets please just close this thread.

Okay, let's say that arguments against the format of yi-latn are dropped, whether temporarily and permanently.

The most important outstanding issue would be the "precedent" issue and the disagreements about country code and script codes used together (which of course is stronger if someone attempted to register one claiming there was a precedent).

To recap the codes for which registration is currently sought are:

az-arab
az-cyrl
az-latn

zh-hans
zh-hant

sr-cyrl
sr-latn

uz-cyrl
uz-latn

My objections to the whole thing have been stated, they were listened to and they have failed to influence many people. Unless someone really feels they need to take up my stance on it I should now drop them for the sake of progress.

None of these codes contain country codes, they bring up the question of interaction with country codes only indirectly. For that matter they do not touch on a variety of other issues (Braille codings, Pinyin vs. Wade-Giles vs. Lessing, historical variations in orthography) which may come into play, though they do perhaps imply them.

Could we register these (and allow sr-cyrl if only because allowing sr, sr-cyrl and sr-latn leaves any politically-motivated opinion about that/those language(s) to be expressed rather than have us rule on it), and then declare a moratorium on any registration that uses an extension on this syntax until such a syntax has been worked out completely (whether this involves more discussion here, a working document or a new RFC)?

The fact that someone needs these codes for work right now is bringing a sense of urgency to the wider discussion that I think is ironically causing it to take longer than it would without the sense of a deadline looming.