[Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930
"Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> Mon, 18 June 2007 15:35 UTC
Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0JGT-0006Fm-0B; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:35:37 -0400
Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1I0JGR-0006Em-J0 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:35:35 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0JGR-0006Eb-9P for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:35:35 -0400
Received: from mta10.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.202]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0JGP-0005Oo-Us for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:35:35 -0400
Received: from DGBP7M81 ([76.167.184.182]) by mta10.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20070618153521.OXWF15873.mta10.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:35:21 +0000
Message-ID: <00c301c7b1be$478e9e20$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81>
From: Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <E1I0ESL-0007jY-PO@megatron.ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 08:35:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9
Subject: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org
Martin Duerst <duerst at it dot aoyama dot ac dot jp> quoted Frank Ellermann: >> At the moment you can reconstruct a 3066 registry by looking at the >> redundant / grandfathered tags in the 4646 registry, and in the source >> standards (i.e. the language and region subtags in the 4646 registry). >> >> IOW just stay away from scripts, variants, and UN region numbers. No need to do that. Just go to http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-tags . IANA must be keeping the old registry around for some reason; this must be it. Martin wrote: > I remember that in the transition period from RFC 3066 to RFC 4646, we had > somebody requesting registration of el-Latn. We rejected this because with > RFC 4646, there would be no such need anymore. With the interpretation > above, that would no longer be true. Actually, we accepted it but it initially failed to make it into the 3066 registry, since by that time 4646 was very close at hand indeed. Months after 4646 weas released, the requestor argued forcefully to have "el-Latn" added to both registries. IIRC there were veiled legal threats. > No. There is no old registry. There is only one registry. The current > registry IS the RFC 3066 registry, just slightly overhauled. > > With this, of course the reasons for citing RFC 3066 when RFC 4646 was out > become even less understandable. I admit to a lot of confusion regarding Scott's explanation. When I was working on 4645, I heard frequently that RFC references must always refer to the latest revision, not to RFCs that have been superseded. I'm sure nobody wants RFC authors to be able to pick and choose among obsolete RFCs to find the one with the most favorable, now-removed wording. -- Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
- [Ltru] Small bibliography error in RFC 4930 Stephane Bortzmeyer
- [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930 Stephane Bortzmeyer
- [Ltru] RE: [ietf-provreg] Small bibliography erro… Hollenbeck, Scott
- [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930 Frank Ellermann
- RE: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Martin Duerst
- RE: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Debbie Garside
- [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930 Frank Ellermann
- [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930 Frank Ellermann
- RE: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… John Cowan
- [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930 Doug Ewell
- [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930 Alice Hagens
- [Ltru] Re: [ietf-provreg] Small bibliography erro… Alice Hagens
- [Ltru] RE: [ietf-provreg] Small bibliography erro… Hollenbeck, Scott
- [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930 Frank Ellermann
- Re: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… John Cowan
- RE: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Martin Duerst
- Re: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Martin Duerst
- Re: [Ltru] RE: [ietf-provreg] Small bibliography … Martin Duerst
- RE: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Debbie Garside
- RE: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Debbie Garside
- [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930 Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Addison Phillips
- RE: [Ltru] RE: [ietf-provreg] Small bibliography … Hollenbeck, Scott
- [Ltru] Modified: field in the registry? (Was: Sma… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 49… Doug Ewell
- [Ltru] Modification of the Added field (Was: Smal… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- [Ltru] Re: Modification of the Added field (Was: … Doug Ewell