Anomaly in upcoming registry

[Doug Ewell]

Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring dot com> wrote:

> There's no way that I'd be willing to start another round of ltru 
> revsions to make the handling of such a hypothetical any clearer.  At 
> some point folks need to realize that the BCP is not an algorithm for 
> execution by finite state automata.  It gives guidelines to humans 
> who, one would hope, are capable of exercising a bit of common sense.

I would hope it's blindingly obvious to Randy and everyone else that I 
agree with this statement.  I would not want to start another round of 
LTRU revisions for almost any reason.

Every so often we talk about adding ISO 639-6 support, which would be a 
good enough reason, but only if (a) the draft and data were fully 
available for WG review, (b) ISO publication appeared imminent, and (c) 
the WG had some hope of agreeing where to put the subtags 
architecturally.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ