revision of ISO 3166
petercon at microsoft.com
Tue Sep 7 15:50:47 CEST 2004
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Michael Everson
> >Nobody seems to have anything they want to say regarding stability
> Is it necessary?
> As the Language-Tag Reviewer, I have had little luck following the
> drafts of the revisions, so early on I just threw up my hands and
> waited for the rules to congeal by consensus of others.
Umm... I was talking about the revision of ISO 3166; now you're talking
about the revision of RFC 3066. Two different things.
> To date I
> detect little actual consensus given the tug-of-war between people
> who want a Swiss-army-knife code that doesn't just tag languages but
> is a portmanteau for all the locale stuff people also want.
Two points (on the topic of RFC 3066bis, not ISO 3166):
- There has been debate, but at this point I think there is growing
consensus. I certainly am satisfied with the latest draft (modulo the
editorial comments I made) and would like to see this approved.
- There is nothing specifically locale-related in this proposal;
everything is appropriately applicable to declaring linguistic and
writing-related properties of linguistic content or resources.
> For years I have urged the ISO 639 and ISO 3166 committees to adhere
> to stability.
Those responsible for ISO 639 "get it". Those responsible for ISO 3166
appear not to share the same concerns.
More information about the Ietf-languages