petercon at microsoft.com
Fri Sep 11 06:00:30 CEST 2009
From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
> ...the Reviewer ... is expected to be an expert as well as a referee, much more than
> (say) a WG chair. His or her opinion on technical merits does count more than yours
> or mine.
I certainly don't see that stated anywhere. Rather, 3.2 of RFC 5646 states:
should be familiar with BCP 47 and its requirements; be willing to
fairly, responsively, and judiciously administer the registration
process; and be suitably informed about the issues of language
identification so that the reviewer can assess the claims and draw
upon the contributions of language experts and subtag requesters.
Note: the Reviewer needs to be informed enough to make use of the contribution of experts, not to make unilateral choices.
More information about the Ietf-languages