Results of Duplicate Busters Survey #2

[Kent Karlsson]

I care that the same description is NOT used for several
different languages. (Using the same description for
several codes that denote the SAME language is ok.) The
problem cases were listed by Doug, and this issue should
be resolved in the way Doug suggested w.r.t. 639-2 and 639-3
descriptions. This means in some cases to remove a 639-2
description in favour of the corresponding 639-3 description.

	/kent k


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no 
> [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of 
> Michael Everson
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 3:30 PM
> To: ietflang IETF Languages Discussion
> Subject: Re: Results of Duplicate Busters Survey #2
> 
> Doug has asked me to rule on his survey.
> 
> I am happy with the 639-3 name only. However, I can accept that the  
> 639-2 name could be added alongside if Frank Ellerman insists (since  
> no one else seems to care much).
> 
> Frank, please state your preference, so we can be done with this.
> 
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>