Requests that have been on hold
cewcathar at hotmail.com
Sun Aug 9 23:39:22 CEST 2009
Doug, thanks for remembering these!
Also, why is the added date for [vmf] (and other new subtags) appear as:Added: 2029-09-09
???Should not it be: Added: 2009-09-09Or??(I'm sorry I am new at this; it does not look right but I am sure it is me.) I suppose I should create three separate threads for the rest of this. Best, C. E. Whiteheadcewcathar at hotmail.com
Doug Ewell doug at ewellic.org
Sun Aug 9 07:26:13 CEST 2009
> Now that we have access to the full RFC 4646bis Registry, with its ISO > 639-3-based subtags, it's probably a good time to go back and review the > various proposals that have been discussed, but put on hold until the > new Registry took effect.
> This would include at least the following proposals:
> . . .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages