Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomaly in upcoming registry)

"Doug Ewell" <doug@ewellic.org> Tue, 14 July 2009 00:21 UTC

Return-Path: <doug@ewellic.org>
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 AB52C28C697 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.363, BAYES_00=-2.599, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=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 ZSG0s8aHir1Q for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:21:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plsmtpa01-04.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa01-04.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [72.167.82.84]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9AEA228C6EB for <ltru@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 2351 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2009 00:20:45 -0000
Received: from unknown (67.166.27.148) by p3plsmtpa01-04.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (72.167.82.84) with ESMTP; 14 Jul 2009 00:20:45 -0000
Message-ID: <1AD53C39B9F24C12BC31AB76AF5D1B89@DGBP7M81>
From: "Doug Ewell" <doug@ewellic.org>
To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <mailman.113.1247511614.10405.ltru@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:20:44 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
Subject: Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomaly in upcoming registry)
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: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:21:13 -0000

"Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon dot com> wrote:

> In the meantime, we could use some experience with rfc-to-be-4646bis. 
> Constant rewriting will not improve matters.

I specifically would not want to recharter for the purpose of tweaking 
the existing text.  In fact, I might not participate in a LTRU 3.0 at 
all if tweaking the existing text turns out to take a large percentage 
of the WG's time, as it did in LTRU 2.0.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ