Re: [Ltru] Issue #36 (AD comment #3) rules for UN M.49 codes
CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com> Sun, 12 April 2009 13:52 UTC
Return-Path: <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
X-Original-To: ltru@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ltru@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974723A6C28 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Apr 2009 06:52:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.354
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.354 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.244, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XC5mMnTrpTw7 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Apr 2009 06:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blu0-omc3-s33.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc3-s33.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.116.108]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C76C3A6C1D for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Apr 2009 06:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLU109-W23 ([65.55.116.72]) by blu0-omc3-s33.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 12 Apr 2009 06:53:38 -0700
Message-ID: <BLU109-W23FC5DF246B5D53DB9FD06B37E0@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_c426dc20-4d7d-4de6-896b-42c9791e8ed9_"
X-Originating-IP: [70.88.11.82]
From: CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
To: ltru@ietf.org
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 09:53:38 -0400
Importance: Normal
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Apr 2009 13:53:38.0636 (UTC) FILETIME=[14CE28C0:01C9BB76]
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue #36 (AD comment #3) rules for UN M.49 codes
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 13:52:29 -0000
Don't know if I should inject my two cents here; I agree with Mark that "SHOULD NOT" should become a "MUST NOT" As for the other "SHOULD"s/"MUST"s (section 3.5, 4.5) I don't know enough to comment. Best, C. E. Whitehead cewcathar@hotmail.com >> From: "Alexey Melnikov" <alexey.melnikov at isode.com> >> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru at ietf.org> >> Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 1:08 AM >> Subject: [Ltru] AD review of draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-21bis.txt >> 3). Section 2.2.4 says: >> >> > F. All other UN numeric codes for countries or areas that do not >> > have an associated ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code MUST NOT be >> > entered into the registry and MUST NOT be used to form >> > language tags. For more information about these codes, see >> > Section 3.4. >> >> And Section 3.4 says: >> >> > 16. UN M.49 has codes for both countries and areas (such as '276' >> > for Germany) and geographical regions and sub-regions (such as >> > '150' for Europe). UN M.49 country or area codes for which >> > there is no corresponding ISO 3166-1 code SHOULD NOT be >> >> Unless I am confused, I think this SHOULD NOT contradicts MUST NOT in >> section 2.2.4. > I think you need to change one of 2 sections.
- Re: [Ltru] Issue #36 (AD comment #3) rules for UN… CE Whitehead