Proposal to reserve ISO 3166-1 code elements

[Doug Ewell]

Addison Phillips <addison at yahoo dash inc dot com> wrote:

> -1
>
> I disagree with reserving most of these old codes for exactly the same 
> reason: most of the withdrawn codes were junk (Antarctic territories 
> feature prominently) and don't represent codes that describe language 
> variation. Furthermore, all of the earlier list were withdrawn before 
> there was ever an RFC 1766 and thus have never been valid in language 
> tags. At least a case can be made for them never being valid.
>
> I support reserving 'DD' and 'YD', but the others should be freely 
> recycled if necessary, as they can still go into the language registry 
> with no problem. After all, the whole point of designating a "Date A" 
> in the first place was so that as much of the ISO 3166 code space 
> would be open for recycling as possible.

I'm fine with scaling back this request to just DD and VD.

>From a purist standpoint, I think the MA's policy should be consistent 
that no formerly assigned code elements should ever be reused, no matter 
how insignificant the spit of land.  But I am asking for this out of an 
interest in language tagging, not as a purist, so if reserving just DD 
and VD will make things easier, that's OK.

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California, USA
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/