Delay in registering new ISO-based subtags

[Scott Hollenbeck]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Ewell [mailto:dewell at adelphia.net] 
> Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 4:13 PM
> To: ietf-languages at iana.org
> Cc: Michael Everson; Scott Hollenbeck
> Subject: Delay in registering new ISO-based subtags
> 
> I'm trying to find out the reason for the continued delay in 
> submitting the seven Language Subtag Modification forms to 
> IANA, in accordance with Section 3.3 of RFC 3066bis, as 
> described on my Web page [1].

[snip]
 
> I'd like to know if the reason for this delay is:
> 
> 1.  Confusion over whether RFC 3066bis applies here; that is, 
> whether we are in the "RFC 3066bis era" yet.
> 
> I'd like Scott to rule on this, unequivocally.

Once the IESG approves a document for publication as a BCP it is "in force".

> 2.  Confusion over whether Michael Everson is the Language 
> Subtag Reviewer responsible for this.
> 
> IESG stated on February 21 [2] that "We also confirm that the 
> IETF language reviewer remains Michael Everson."
> 
> Scott mentioned on February 20 [3] that the question of 
> appointing a Reviewer "will be discussed during the next IESG 
> telechat on 2 March 2006."  He added, "The IESG's decision 
> will be announced in the usual places; I will ensure that 
> this list receives a copy."  This was last Thursday; I'd like 
> Scott to comment on the expected date by which this decision 
> will be made available.

You must have missed the note I sent where I said that Ted and I would NOT
be dealing with this issue on the 2nd because of the debate over the
description of the reviewer's duties that's included in 3066bis.  I have
asked the chairs of the LTRU list to determine what they want to do with
that text.  They haven't confirmed anything; Ted and I haven't acted.  Once
the reviewer's duties are confirmed the ADs will need to make sure that we
have a reviewer in place who is willing to perform the review functions and
possibly delegate the administrative functions.

With IETF-65 looming, and IESG membership changing, it is unlikely that this
will be settled before I leave the IESG.  Ted and Lisa will probably have to
deal with this after the Dallas meeting and after we know what the working
group wants to do with the document.

Michael Everson remains the reviewer until he resigns or the IESG appoints
someone else to the role.  Neither has happened, so he is still the
IESG-appointed reviewer.

The remaining questions aren't mine to answer.

-Scott-