Appeal to ISO 639 RA in support of Elfdalian

Martin J. Dürst duerst at
Sat Apr 23 13:27:18 CEST 2016

Hello Peter,

On 2016/04/23 19:08, Peter Constable wrote:
> From: Mats Blakstad [mailto:mats.gbproject at]

>> I completely understand that argument. However, it is the process that the RA
>> themselves have led, giving special requirements for Elfdalian for assigning a
>> language code that are not given for other languages, that put us in this situation.
> It is _the openness of the RA’s process_ that has enabled us to be discussing this at all! Otherwise, you would have received a rejection without any idea as to why or as to who else provided what input.
> But now some of you here seem to want that openness to be by-passed because it suits your purposes. We can’t have it both ways.

I think there are different issues here that should be carefully 
distinguished. One is openness, the other is due process, and the third 
is a fixed schedule. They are ways in which these may be linked, but 
they are not the same.

It's perfectly possible for the RA to be open and follow due process 
even if they don't cling to their fixed once-a year update schedule.

Regards,   Martin.

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list