Anomaly in upcoming registry

[Peter Constable]

Cherry picking whether or not to include an entity from a source standard is one thing, and something LTRU had consensus on avoiding.

Cherry picking on decisions regarding deprecation is, IMO, quite a different matter.


Peter

From: gerard.meijssen at gmail.com [mailto:gerard.meijssen at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 1:04 AM
To: Peter Constable
Cc: ietf-languages at iana.org
Subject: Re: Anomaly in upcoming registry

Hoi,
Cherry picking standards seems to me a way that will confuse people. When a work like this depends on standards, you make it impossible for people to understand how and why this is true. It would also allow people to make their own choices. They can do so because by removing the standard from the standard, this work is either a standard in its own right and consequently it deserves no more credibility then that it gives to other standards it says it relies on.
Thanks,
      GerardM
2009/7/9 Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft.com<mailto:petercon at microsoft.com>>
In this case I agree with the conclusion -- we don't want to collapse these.

On the other hand, I'm not completely in agreement with your premise that this is solely ISO 639's call and that we have no say. We could choose to collapse these even if ISO 639 doesn't if we think that is the right thing to do for consumers of the LST registry. If ISO 639 chose to collapse these, we could choose to leave them as is if we think that is the right thing to do for consumers of the LST registry.

There are times when we simply want to follow what ISO does and not "second guess"; there are also times when we don't want to be subject to everything ISO may do -- such provisions are even baked into BCP 47.

IMO, if we think that sh not be deprecated for consumers of the LST registry, then we should go ahead and make that decision, regardless of whatever ISO 639-1 or ISO 639-3 may do.



Peter


-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no<mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no> [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no<mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no>] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:52 PM
To: ietf-languages at iana.org<mailto:ietf-languages at iana.org>
Subject: Re: Anomaly in upcoming registry
Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring dot com> wrote:

> Where I *don't* want this discussion to go is down the path of whether
> any of the languages formerly known as Serbo-Croatian should be
> collapsed, as Romanian and Moldovan (rightly) were.

Agreed.  It's not our call, it's ISO 639's call.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no<mailto:Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no>
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no<mailto:Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no>
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20090712/347049ae/attachment-0001.htm