Subject: [Ltru] Review of 4646bis-10: registration authorities

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 16:16:21 -0500

Throughout 4646bis-10 there is confusion between "registration authority",
"maintenance authority", "maintenance agency", and "maintaining authority".
Technically, in ISO a registration authority has discretion to choose
which code elements it registers and which it does not, whereas a maintenance
agency tracks what other organizations do.  ISO 639 has registration
authorities, and ISO 15942 has one; but ISO 3166 has a maintenance agency,
because it can only register the countries that UNSD assigns numerical codes to.

I think these are all the affected places:

2.2.1: remove the words "or governing standardization bodies" from points 1 and 2;
the whole point of the RA is so that ISO doesn't have to do registration itself.

2.2.3: s/maintenance agency/registration authority/.

2.2.6 (6):  s/maintaining authority/registration authority/ (for extensions)

3.4 (13): s/maintenance or registration authority/registration authority or maintenance agency/

3.4 (14) (B):  for "ISO 639 maintenance agency/registration authority (MA/RA) has"
read "The ISO 639 registration authorities have".

3.4 (15): s/registration authority for ISO 3166/maintenance agency for ISO 3166/.

3.6: s/maintenance agency/registration authority/ for all 639-* standards.

3.7: s/maintaining or registering authority/registration authority/.  Follow
this sentence with a parenthetical sentence saying:

	(For this purpose, the term "registration authority" includes
	maintenance agencies.)

3.7: s/maintaining authority/registration authority/ (several places).

5.2: s/maintaining authority/registration authority/ (2 places).

-- 
All Gaul is divided into three parts: the part          John Cowan
that cooks with lard and goose fat, the part            http://ccil.org/~cowan
that cooks with olive oil, and the part that            [email-masked]
cooks with butter. -- David Chessler

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: Peter Constable <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 20:44:15 -0800

> From: John Cowan [mailto:[email-masked]]

> the whole point of the RA is so that ISO doesn't have to do

At times, however, the relevant technical committee may publish a new edition or an amendment of a standard which incorporates certain changes to code tables. This was intentionally added in 3066 to cover all possible scenarios.

Peter

---

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 00:24:10 -0500

Peter Constable scripsit:

> At times, however, the relevant technical committee may publish a
> new edition or an amendment of a standard which incorporates certain
> changes to code tables. This was intentionally added in 3066 to cover
> all possible scenarios.

Ah.  Concedo.

-- 
MEET US AT POINT ORANGE AT MIDNIGHT BRING YOUR DUCK OR PREPARE TO FACE WUGGUMS
John Cowan      [email-masked]      http://www.ccil.org/~cowan

---

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:53:09 -0500

> I think these are all the affected places:

[2.2.1 correction omitted, per Peter's objection]