Initial Language Subtag Registry
RFC 4645
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.
(Ted Hardie) Yes
(Scott Hollenbeck) Yes
(Brian Carpenter) No Objection
Comment (2005-10-11 for -)
No email
send info
send info
Disclosure: Mark Davis, co-editor of draft-ietf-ltru-registry, works for the same employer as me, but in a different department. Editorial nit from Gen-ART review by Elwyn Davies: The new title of Figure 2 should be 'Registry Record Format' and not 'record-jar format' (which it isn't in any case).
(Margaret Cullen) No Objection
(Bill Fenner) (was Discuss, No Objection) No Objection
(Sam Hartman) No Objection
Comment (2005-10-12 for -)
No email
send info
send info
I think that as this draft is structured today, it needs to be a BCP. I do share the concerns of those who believe we may have gotten something wrong and that we wish we had a good mechanism for incremental updates or for progression. I don't think calling this a proposed standard gives us any of those things; it just confuses what is going on. I hope we're right with this draft or the mess will be impressive. I'd like to thank Scott and the WG chairs for all the hard work in dealing with the /last call. I found the summary absolutely essential to reviewing the discussion. I did end up going back and reading most of the messages, but the summary was quite useful in focusing my efforts. I explicitly evaluated the security concern regarding privacy and information exposure through tags. q I think the current text in security considerations is appropriate for that issue.
(Russ Housley) No Objection
Comment (2005-10-12 for -)
No email
send info
send info
In section 3 of draft-ietf-ltru-initial-05, it might be useful for the document to include the URL of the IANA registry. It seems to me that anyone interested in this document will want to locate the IANA registry too.