Status of Japanese requests

[Doug Ewell]

What is our current status regarding the requests for Japanese 
romanization variants proposed by Frank Bennett?  I note that:

(a) the records and forms have been posted for about a week (so there is 
still about a week to go);

(b) nobody has objected to the two subtags for Hepburn and its LOC 
subvariants;

(c) an objection was raised to the Nihon-shiki subtag on the basis that 
"ISO 3602 Strict" is not formally defined anywhere;

(d) nobody has come forth with alternative wording and references for 
that subtag (I would have thought "Nihon-shiki romanization" would be an 
adequate Description, but we do also need a reference);

(e) the Reviewer has not commented on this issue.

My assumption right now is that we are going forward with 'hepburn' and 
'heploc' and not currently going forward with 'nihon'.  What about 
'kunrei'?  That subtag references "ISO 3602" in the Description (though 
again I don't think that is strictly necessary; it could be in a 
Comments field instead), and nobody has disputed that ISO 3602 does 
provide a definition of Kunrei-shiki.  But it could easily be argued 
that the requester only asked for Hepburn subtags, that there is no 
demonstrated need for the other two, and that adding 'kunrei' without 
'nihon' would be bizarre.

Some input, please.

--
Doug Ewell  |  Thornton, Colorado, USA  |  http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14  |  ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s ­