Duplicate Busters: Survey #1
nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de
Thu Jul 31 13:14:00 CEST 2008
Doug Ewell wrote:
> This survey deals with exact duplicates
+1 for all NO CHANGE based on "x is deprecated in favour of y"
+1 for all NO CHANGE for "private use"
If a 4646bis would be published it apparently offers a new
field "Scope" to disambiguate "macrolanguage" from the same
description used for an "individual language".
If that is so the context explaining why there is a dupe is
in the registry, a similar situation as for the "deprecated"
dupes. Therefore the source description should stay as is.
For three of the four remaining cases (Aruá, Awa, Murik) it
would be nice to get the disambiguation in the *source*, or
as a comment. Don't touch their Descriptions, it is the job
of the source to get it right, and it is the job of Comments
to offer critical missing info.
The last case (Borna) is arguably no real dupe, bwo is also
known as Boro, bbx is only known as Borna.
Survey #1, are there coming more ?
More information about the Ietf-languages