Linguasphere -- An appeal for clarity
petercon at microsoft.com
Fri Jun 4 20:41:00 CEST 2004
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Misha Wolf
> Please can we keep separate the discussions...
[in a subsequent message]
> Reading the various mails, I feel that people are
> arguing at cross-purposes.
Debbie has made comments on this list suggesting positive answers for
both questions. As I'm concerned about what happens re Q2 but also about
how this community perceives what's happening in the ISO arena (Q1 --
e.g. Harald's response to DG's message expressing concern by *too much*
activity related to ISO 639), I felt it was appropriate to put both
issues into appropriate context.
Re Q1, I have said that, at this time, the project Debbie is referring
to is not an ISO project, and that needs analysis has not been provided.
Re Q2, I have said that needs analysis has not been provided, and that I
am inclined to think a huge codeset at the level of granularity proposed
would not be a good thing for a successor of RFC 3066 and its consuming
Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
Microsoft Windows Division
More information about the Ietf-languages