be-tarask voting results

[Debbie Garside]

 Frank wrote:

> Sure.  I'd oppose the registration of "classic" for various 
> reasons related to "generic" variants:  Folks could try to 
> use it anywhere, not only with the registered prefix "be".

I agree.  This has been debated before and I thought we agreed that whilst
generic tags could be quite useful in principle (I seem to remember thinking
Marks ideas for generic Eastern and Western were an ingenious use of the RFC
rules), the scope for misuse is vast which is why we decided against.

Debbie Garside
www.geolang.com



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no 
> [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of 
> Frank Ellermann
> Sent: 06 April 2007 10:14
> To: ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> Subject: Re: be-tarask voting results
> 
> Jaska Zedlik wrote:
> 
> > is it possible to change the subtag name from be-tarask to 
> be-classic?
> 
> Sure.  I'd oppose the registration of "classic" for various 
> reasons related to "generic" variants:  Folks could try to 
> use it anywhere, not only with the registered prefix "be".
> 
> They could also try to register it for completely different 
> purposes and other prefixes, resulting in a very convoluted 
> subtag record (multiple descriptions and multiple comments 
> depending on the prefix).
> 
> OTOH for "tarask" collisions with other purposes are unlikely.
> 
> Frank
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
> 
> 
>