Pointers from registry to documentation

Addison Phillips addison at yahoo-inc.com
Wed Jun 28 21:02:11 CEST 2006

FWIW, the original proposal for file-level comments was made here:


The issue was tracked in the issue tracker here:


And the resolution was:

After discussion, rough consensus was that this as a "nice to have"
rather than an essential addition, and that it was more important
to finish the WG last call and submit the draft for publication.
Consequently, this item is marked "rejected".

Addison Phillips
Internationalization Architect - Yahoo! Inc.

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 Doug Ewell
> Sent: mercredi 28 juin 2006 09:31
> To: ietf-languages at iana.org; LTRU Working Group
> Subject: Re: Pointers from registry to documentation
> Richard Ishida <ishida at w3 dot org> wrote:
> > I have been given an action by the W3C Architecture Domain 
> to request 
> > that the language subtag registry at 
> > http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry contain a 
> > pointer to the document that explains what the field names mean.
> >
> > Would it be possible to include a comment at the top of the 
> document 
> > containing the URI of the spec?
> Early "planning" versions of the Registry were in a 
> vertical-bar-delimited format, not record-jar, and did 
> contain a header 
> comment explaining the nature of the file and describing the fields. 
> When we switched to record-jar in April 2005, there was no 
> provision for 
> a file-level comment, only the "Comments:" fields that applies to 
> individual records.  Around August, someone apparently 
> proposed adding a 
> file-level comment, but there was little support at the time 
> for adding 
> this.  I can't find the exact thread at the moment.
> I think the general feeling was that the RFC should point to the 
> Registry, not necessarily the other way around.
> The LTRU Working Group could choose to reopen this topic at 
> the time it 
> revises RFC 3066bis to incorporate ISO 639-3-based subtags.
> --
> Doug Ewell
> Fullerton, California, USA
> http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list