About: Tags for Identifying
mikeksar at microsoft.com
Fri Mar 5 23:05:15 CET 2004
Note that the expiration date of this draft should say August 11, 2004
instead of August 11, 2003.
From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no
[mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Addison
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 2:07 AM
To: John Clews; ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
Subject: RE: About: Tags for Identifying
Thanks for the note. Let me see if I can answer your questions.
The current expiration date is in 2004. Before that date the draft will
hopefully advance to the next stage of standardization (or be revised so
that it can so progress). Each new draft changes the expiry date. This
the main draft so far in revising RFC3066.
The newest draft includes UN M49 codes.
Addison P. Phillips
Director, Globalization Architecture
webMethods | Delivering Global Business Visibility
Chair, W3C Internationalization (I18N) Working Group
Chair, W3C-I18N-WG, Web Services Task Force
Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no
> [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no]On Behalf Of John Clews
> Sent: vendredi 5 mars 2004 10:56
> To: ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> Subject: About: Tags for Identifying Languages
> This cropped up during discussion on the re: Hawick Scots language
> Addison Phillips <aphillips at webmethods.com> wrote to
> Chris Lunn <shiieru at yahoo.co.uk> with copies to
> ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> > Hi Chris,
> > I'm not qualified to comment on your particular request, but have a
> > small technical suggestion... You might want to consider a tag with
> > five or more characters, since there is an
> > Internet-Draft circulating that would require a length of five or
> > Cf
> Could somebody comment on the following:
> 1. The document at this URL repeatedly states:
> "This Internet-Draft will expire on August 11, 2003."
> What's its current status?
> 2. It covers the CS/CS problem well in dealing with ISO 3166 codes
> (though naturally it would be better if the ISO 3166/MA didn't do such
> stupid things - has anybody heard of top-level actions regarding the
> allocation of the CS code in ISO 3166?)
> 3. In my view, it would also do well to allow inclusion of the widely
> LOCODEs to specify locations.
> 4. In my view, it would also do well to refer to ISO 639-3 codes, once
> that gets passed.
> 5. Will the expiry of this draft on August 11, 2003 allow for any of
> to happen?
> 6. Is this the main draft so far in any efforts to "revise" RFC 3066?
> Many thanks in advance for any comments.
> John Clews
> John Clews,
> Keytempo Limited (Information Management),
> 8 Avenue Rd, Harrogate,
> HG2 7PG
> Tel: +44 1423 888 432 (landline)
> Tel: +44 7766 711 395 (mobile)
> Email: scripts20 at uk2.net
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
More information about the Ietf-languages