Khotanese and Sakan
doug at ewellic.org
Thu Oct 23 06:21:22 CEST 2008
John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:
>> We should make the corresponding change to 'kho' in the current
>> Registry, but we need to hope that 639-3 removes 'xsk' soon, as
>> noted, or draft-4645bis is going to have a duplicate name.
> I don't see that this is any different from he vs. iw.
'he' and 'iw' are allowed to have the same Description because one of
them is deprecated with the other one as its Preferred-Value. 'iw' is
deprecated in the Registry because it was withdrawn from ISO 639 when
they introduced 'he'. If 639-3 does the same, withdrawing 'xsk' at the
same time they add the new name to 'kho', then there is no problem.
Otherwise, we have roughly the same problem we were going to have with
Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
More information about the Ietf-languages