Re: [Ltru] Charter Discussion

Karen_Broome@spe.sony.com scripsit:

> RFC 3066 does not seem to approach the scope of this work at all as
> far as the number of data elements it contains. It seems to me that
> ISO 11179 is more appropriate for registries with a larger number of
> metadata types -- something on the IANA scale, not just RFC 3066.

A cursory look at parts of 11179 leads me to agree; the Language Subtag
Registry is not a "metadata registry" in the relevant sense.  The
metadata registry for language subtags would list the field names in
the registry such as "Subtag:", "Description", "Comment:", etc. etc.,
and is simply too trivial to warrant the application of 11179.

So I withdraw my support for considering 11179 in the new charter.

-- 
John Cowan  cowan@ccil.org  http://ccil.org/~cowan
If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing
on my shoulders.
        --Hal Abelson

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru