draft-05: (mostly) editorial comments (3)
petercon at microsoft.com
Sat Aug 28 21:08:44 CEST 2004
From: Addison Phillips [wM] [mailto:aphillips at webmethods.com]
> > What happens if an ID is added to ISO 639? E.g.
> > "i-navaho" was registered, but later obsoleted by
> > addition of a code in ISO 639. Will that continue to
> > be the case or not? If not, then I would state that
> > explicitly.
> AP> That would be the last sentence. Grandfathered tags
> (like "i-navaho") become deprecated due to registration
> of subtags (like 'nv'). I'll add an example.
My example fit because it describes something that actually happened before, but was less than ideal since it involves a grandfathered tag. Let me try again: suppose I register a registered-lang subtag "afnoric", and then later ISO 639 gets a code "afn" (say) for the same language. In the past, the registered item would have been deprecated. If that's not the case now, I'm suggesting that be stated explicitly so that nobody gets the wrong impression from past practice.
PC>>Section 3.1: The structure of records isn't documented within the most recent version of the draft registry Doug Ewell has done. I think it should be included there as well as here.
AP> Do we need text to that effect?
No, not at all; just a suggestion for the data file only. It doesn't have to be a long description; just a line showing what each of the fields are would be appreciated.
PC>>I had suggested when RFC 3066 was being drafted that reference to entries in Ethnologue should be suggested...
AP> Is it really necessary? Endorsing particular references invites unnecessary criticism of the draft. Getting the references has never posed a problem in the past.
If you're concerned it will invite criticism, leave it as it is.
More information about the Ietf-languages