Archival of registration forms

Doug Ewell dewell at
Tue Apr 24 07:54:25 CEST 2007

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer at nic dot fr> wrote:

>> At the specified address, you can find the language subtag registry 
>> but not the actual registration forms.
> This is specially annoying since, apparently, the "official" 
> registration form, the one which was sent to the IANA, does not seem 
> to be always publically available. For instance, the form for the 
> variant "baku1926" did not appear in ietf-languages (to find out what 
> it looked like, you have to read several messages and to integrate the 
> various patches proposed and accepted).

This would be easier if we could require the proposer to be responsible 
for updating his or her own form, and resubmitting it as necessary to 
reflect changes required by the Reviewer or recommended by the list. 
Some registration forms over the past year have required major 
clarification or other cleanup before they were well-defined enough to 
go into the Registry.

I've always thought we were doing the proposer a service by considering 
and registering their subtags based on incomplete or vague forms plus a 
lot of discussion.  Probably this was misguided.

Those of you who have experience with proposals for ISO, ANSI, BSI, WG2, 
Unicode, etc., either at the submitting or evaluating end, can probably 
share the pros and cons of the approaches taken by those bodies, and 
suggest a better way forward for us.

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

> I too find it questionable when the final registered format is not 
> sent to the list prior to forwarding (or at least as part of 
> forwarding) to IANA. In fact, I suspect that, given the stability 
> guarantees and rules in RFC 4646, such registrations can be appealed 
> if they differ from the requested record.

I agree that the final record that is sent to IANA should be cc'd to 
ietf-languages (not LTRU).  I would not tend to agree that it should be 
sent *before* final submission to IANA; that is what the review period 
is for.

Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list