[Ltru] Re: Small bibliography error in RFC 4930

Debbie Garside <debbie at ictmarketing dot co dot uk> wrote:

> Is there a way to pull that historical registry once ISO 639-3 is added?

In theory it's always possible to recover a historical version of the RFC 
*4646* Registry by looking at the "Added" dates.  This actually doesn't work 
perfectly because modifications don't affect the Added date.

Extracting the RFC *3066* registry is a different problem, because the 
nature of the records to be extracted isn't the same.  Not only were there 
no script subtags, but language and region subtags weren't defined within 
the 3066 registry, but rather within ISO 639 and 3166 (so users had to dig 
through the standards to find valid code elements, and the status of 
"withdrawn" code elements was unclear).  The 3066 registry contained only 
things that we would today consider for "variant" status.  Going from 4646 
to 3066 has more to do with understanding the two specifications and 
registries, and the differences between them, than with the actual data.

--
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