Re: [Ltru] Re: Frank's comments

At 00:43 07/12/06, Doug Ewell wrote:
>Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote:

>> Maybe we discussed the opposite, a union splitting again (DE breaking up into "DE3" and DD again, recycling DD should be a no-brainer.  It's ugly that DE3 is a proper subset of DE2 in this case, on the other hand DE3 == DE1 as it was before the union.  All theoretical, of course... :-)
>
>To play devil's advocate: WG members, what are the disadvantages of allowing a deprecated subtag to become un-deprecated, if it is resurrected in the underlying ISO standard?

Technically, I can see a difference between the case where there is
Preferred-Value: information, and the case where there is no such
value. Looking through the current registry, such a rule would
give reasonable results in most cases that I can envision, but
not necessarily in all of them (e.g. YU goes to CS).

Regards,   Martin.

#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp     

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru