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

"Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Tue, 14 July 2009 20:54 UTC

Return-Path: <randy_presuhn@mindspring.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 DA5FA3A68F3 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:54:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 wouf0p3JTIYE for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:54:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.67]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 670F63A6841 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:53:44 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=GQyL0Ln7UFphQAy6/+1yyOZfIC88rWiQ8ArOX4TR7ro1PhvGDMQDckB2hhQuvn4F; 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;
Received: from [99.55.174.119] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>) id 1MQlvL-0002KF-Ii for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:36:15 -0400
Message-ID: <036201ca04a9$c6500ec0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <548832E2D1D1486EBAC82789E800224A@DGBP7M81> <1d5f01ca04a2$c495dfd0$0c00a8c0@CPQ86763045110>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:37:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478
X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d88884f945684cbf6968b8b354b0ab1091cb11587ce006d23894350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 99.55.174.119
Subject: Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomaly inupcomingregistry)
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 20:54:45 -0000

Hi -

> From: "Debbie Garside" <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk>
> To: "'Doug Ewell'" <doug@ewellic.org>; "'LTRU Working Group'" <ltru@ietf.org>
> Cc: <L.Gillam@surrey.ac.uk>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomaly inupcomingregistry)
...
> I think we pretty much worked this out a few years ago... See
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg06482.html
> But as I said in my previous message, I am not quite ready yet as it will
> involve some flagging of the data.
...

As a technical contributor...

How much content (as a percentage of internet traffic, or as a percentage
of on-line library holdings, for example) would be covered by 639-6 (when
it's done) that would not (or could not) be covered by the registry updates
recently approved and the normal operation of ietf-languages@iana.org?
What languages does it cover that cannot be addressed under the current
regime?

I'd really like to know the what language tagging problem would be fixed by
digging into 639-6, what the payoff (in terms of users served or content tagged)
would be, and why a working group would be necessary to cope with it.

Randy