From: Philippe Verdy (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Sep 12 2006 - 10:25:28 CDT
From: "Doug Ewell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I'm not trying to be rude, but I had already stated that:
> (a) RFC 4646 could not refer normatively to ISO 639-3 since that
> standard was not yet released;
And I DID NOT ask for a normative reference to ISO 639-3. So you don't need to be rude.
What is confusing is the number of references to ISO 639-1 and ISO 639-2 only, in the *normative part* of RFC 4646 (notably in the detailed ABNF syntax of language tags), and the informative reference to SIL's codes as an example of usage for private codes, igoring the fact that many parts of ISO 639-3 have already been decided (i.e. the definitions, most of the policy, but not the content of the draft database itself, which still needs to be reviewed).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Sep 12 2006 - 10:28:57 CDT