- From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 09:38:01 -0400
- To: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
- Cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org, ietf-mta-filters@imc.org, Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org>, public-ietf-collation@w3.org
I propose that the procedure specified in draft-newman-i18n-collation-09 for getting new collations approved should be changed to the procedure used for new language tags. Instead of the requestor sending the request to IANA, who sends it to the Collation Reviewer for discussion on the list, and then the Collation Reviewer sends it back to IANA for registration (or doesn't), remove the first pass through IANA. Have people post directly to the list and work out the details. When the requestor thinks it's ready, the Collation Reviewer wakes up and then either sends the latest draft of the request to IANA or else sends a rejection (with reasons) to the list. This lowers the load on IANA. This scheme has worked very well for ietf-languages@iana.org for the past 11 years. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org http://ccil.org/~cowan "The exception proves the rule." Dimbulbs think: "Your counterexample proves my theory." Latin students think "'Probat' means 'tests': the exception puts the rule to the proof." But legal historians know it means "Evidence for an exception is evidence of the existence of a rule in cases not excepted from."
Received on Thursday, 11 May 2006 13:38:27 UTC