ADMIN: Civility and on-topic, please! (Re: The limit of language codes)

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand]

Marion,

1) The discussion about GB vs UK does not belong on ietf-languages.
2) Political attacks have absolutely no place on ietf-languages.

Your posting is offensive and off-topic. Please stop.

                Harald, listadmin

--On 20. februar 2007 11:45 +0000 Marion Gunn <mgunn at egt.ie> wrote:

> Trying to silence discussion never solved a problem, Doug.
>
> These are the facts:
> 1. Great Britain (GB) excludes Ireland;
> 2. United Kingdom (UK) includes part of Ireland.
> 3. Inability/refusal to accept that difference also tends to mark people
> unable/unwilling to accept the difference between Iran and Iraq.:-(
>
> The specific importance of such difference to laguage tag matters may be
> thus illustrated:
> 4. ga-uk, gd-uk, cy-uk, en-uk all make sense;
> 5. gd-gb, cy-gb, en-gb also make sense;
> 6. ga-gb makes no sense (see 1 above).
> 7. ga-gb is very misleading (ditto).
>
> Can anyone say who are the members of ISO 3166/RA, and what position each
> of those individuals took on the misleading nature of ga-gb when their
> most recent debate on this matter took place, Doug?
> mg
>
> On 19 Feb 2007, at 20:53, scríobh Doug Ewell:
>
>> Marion Gunn <mgunn at egt dot ie> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Inevitably en-uk.
>>>
>>> Instinctively.
>>>
>>
>> When ISO 3166/MA withdraws GB as their code element for United
>> Kingdom and assigns UK in its place, we can have this discussion.
>
> - -
> Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991)
> 27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn, Baile an
> Bhóthair, Co. Átha Cliath, Éire.
> * mgunn at egt.ie * eamonn at egt.ie *
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>