ISO 639-3 changes, part 1

[Doug Ewell]

John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:

> Why can't these be sent to IANA by themselves as soon as the errors 
> are corrected and the time has expired?  I see no reason why all the 
> changes should be collected together before IANA gets any of them -- a 
> pipeline process seems more sensible to me.

If we send a series of small batches of updates to IANA, I would expect 
IANA to apply those batches in turn and publish a series of updates to 
the Registry in rapid succession.  I was hoping to avoid that; I thought 
it would add confusion about "whether we were done yet," and encourage 
us to validate IANA's application of changes from one batch instead of 
focusing on the next batch.

What do other list members think?

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