[Ltru] ISO 639-6

"Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Thu, 12 March 2009 21:03 UTC

DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=rKhX+0alfS1Ub7osMmT9JF+gEc8+Puc8GTm/H1TbRuC0OVaddTbAACJBOXtkik1e; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Message-ID: <00f201c9a356$3ed919a0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: ltru@ietf.org
References: <BLU109-W49EF95306EFBACF120769AB39F0@phx.gbl>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:05:16 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Ltru] ISO 639-6
Precedence: list

Hi -

(changed subject line to reflect topic!)

> From: "CE Whitehead" <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
> To: <ltru@ietf.org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 10:28 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Geocoordinates
...
 > (also where will ISO 639-6 data be looked at?  at ietf?)

As co-chair:

Not here now.  It's not currently in this WG charter, and I know of no other
IETF working group that would be even remotely interested in it.
Discussion whether it makes sense to request a charter update to
include it *is* in order at this time, though  the posts so far give little
sense of urgency or enthusiasm.

> Otherwise I haven't an informed opinion on the closing of this list or ISO 639-6; 
>
> however I hope ietf will continue to let users apply for their own variant subtags.  

That's what 4646bis does, so I don't see how there's any issue.

Randy