ADMIN: Suspension of posting privilleges for Jefsey Morfin

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand]

Once again - this is an offtopic message for the ietf-languages list.

This is not a list for political posturing or meta-discussions about what 
the rules for language tags ought to have been, it is a list for discussing 
the registration of language tags according to the procedures of the 
relevant IETF documents.

Posting privilleges suspended until February 13, 2006, according to RFC 
3934 section 2, which does not permit longer suspensions under the rules of 
that RFC.

I think this is the fifth time.

                   Harald Alvestrand

--On fredag, januar 13, 2006 00:10:42 +0100 "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" 
<jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:

> At 17:12 12/01/2006, Doug Ewell wrote:
>> Markus Scherer <markus dot icu at gmail dot com> wrote:
>>>   Type: Region
>>>   Subtag: EU
>>>   Description: European Union
>>> ...
>>
>> There are already region subtags not only for Europe (150), but also
>> for Northern Europe (154), Southern Europe (039), Eastern Europe
>> (151), and Western Europe (155).  So it is difficult for me to
>> imagine what would be gained by also having a subtag for "European
>> Union."
>
> Delicious...
> This is also true for America. For the same reasons I suppose you will
> agree in removing "us". The golden rule: KISS.
> However, maybe someone can tell me if Hawaï is part from America or from
> Asia?
>
>> I understand the desire to say "French as spoken in Europe," perhaps
>> akin to the oft-cited "Spanish as spoken in Latin America," but to
>> my mind fr-150 serves the first purpose just as well as es-419
>> serves the second.  I don't support the proposal to add the subtag EU.
>
> en-eu is a sometimes quite different from en-uk and en-us. Specially in
> the European intergovernance area where some meanings had to adapt to
> more advanced concepts by non common laws nations.
>
> Dear Markus,
> A few weeks ago a major decision changed the purpose of this list. This
> was a decision made by the Congress of the United States of America. It
> said that the internationalized US Internet, as documented by the IETF,
> is managed by ICANN, of which the IANA langtag registry management is a
> function. This mailing list and the RFC 3066 Bis therefore concern a US
> industry and national system spaning abroad.
>
> This creates a vacuum: the lack of an equivalent registry and
> architectural support for the Multilingual/Multinational Internet. We all
> prefer both to be as much continuity as possible. This is the transition
> organised by Tunis. This is why I asked an IAB guidance on the way to
> proceed. This is also why I finalise an appeal to the IESG against some
> RFC 3066 bis parts, to make the US stystem interoperable quality wise
> with the expected World system. My proposition is even that the US system
> can be used as a default, at least during the transition period.
>
> I note that this kind of debate is a good example of the difference of
> vision between US internationalization and multilingual harmonisation,
> and the problem of compatibilty we will face. For example, non-US Govs
> and people are not interested in countries as such, as are the USA and as
> is RFC 3066 bis.  This is simply because they are the countries. They are
> interested in their own network communities and in domains. They do not
> name domains and languages for e-commerce, but to be support their users.
> "eu" is a top level geographic domain equivalent to "us", "uk", "je",
> "in", "gg", etc.: it will obviously be technically treated equal. But
> many other geographical zones will be treated the same. We see the
> language naming as a service, not as a constraining control tool.
>
> I suppose that many things will also have to adapt with the support of
> ISO 639-6.
>
> jfc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>