LTRU progress and ISO 639-6 (was WiktionaryZ language codes)

[Debbie Garside]

Stephane wrote:

> > Can you send me details of the project?
> 
> Attached.

Ah!  So you really mean LTRU!

What exactly is going on with LTRU.  There seems to be no progress being
made at all.  What has happened to issue tracker.  How do we find out what
the issues are and in what state of discussion they are in?

Randy, Martin, I would really appreciate it if we could have a list of the
issues and possible solutions.  Or have I missed something? Are RFC4645/6bis
on track without me realising?

What are the timescales that we are now working to?  When can we expect the
next draft?  Questions, questions! And why, when it is so relevant to all
the variants currently under discussion
(written/spoken/signed/orthographies/writing systems etc) is ISO 639-6 not
being discussed?

As I have mentioned, both on list and privately, ISO 639-6 is at a stage
where this WG can have significant input.  If members of this WG feel that
there are elements of the 639-6 system that will be difficult to incorporate
within RFC4646bis+ then I need to know NOW!  If I do not hear to the
contrary, I will assume that this WG has no problem with the current
development of ISO 639-6 and will continue along the same vein. 

Having asked so many times for your input, I will be pretty mad if you come
back in a years time and tell me it is not what you want.

Debbie Garside
Editor
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no 
> [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of 
> Stephane Bortzmeyer
> Sent: 13 November 2006 21:25
> To: Debbie Garside
> Cc: ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> Subject: Re: WiktionaryZ language codes
> 
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 06:27:54PM -0000,  Debbie Garside 
> <debbie at ictmarketing.co.uk> wrote  a message of 36 lines which said:
> 
> > Can you send me details of the project?
> 
> Attached.
> 
> [It seems currently stalled.]
>  
>