[Ietf-languages] Re: RFC 5646 Section 3.1.5 Description uniqueness and private use records

[[e-mail]]

Dear all,

I understand the proposed erratum to be excempting records where Description = "Private use" from 3.1.5.

Are the following points potential issues?

1. Description is not stable per Section 3.5. An implementation enforcing the invariant must match the literal string "Private use".

2. Future ISO 639, ISO 15924, or ISO 3166 revisions to private use allocations would create new registry records per Section 3.3. Nothing guarantees those records use the exact string "Private use"; maintenance burden.

3. An erratum would need to address multiple sections: 3.1, 3.5, 4.5 (Canonicalization), 4.6 (Private Use Subtags), possibly 5.2.

If issues, then alternatives:
a) Allow the Scope field on record types other than language and extlang, restricted to the value "private-use", then apply the exception at a scope level.
b) Append subtag range to make descriptions unique per record. (This presumes the uniqueness constraint applies to the registry as a whole rather than per-record after the subtag expansion per section 3.1.1 -- RFC is not clear on that.)


Best regards,
Pétur