Subject: [Ltru] RFC 4646 and ISO TC46

From: Nicolas Krebs <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 19:30:53 +0100

(For the records and the archives.)

Someone wrote in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.idn/1676 
that some part of RFC 4646 has been "defeated at ISO TC46". 
Is this true? 

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

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 11:00:21 -0800

Hi -

> From: "Nicolas Krebs" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 10:30 AM
> Subject: [Ltru] RFC 4646 and ISO TC46
>

The statement makes no sense.  RFC 4646 is an IETF BCP, not an
ISO document.  Due to his persistent disruptive misbehavior,  and
pursuant to RFC 3683, the posting privileges of author of that
article were revoked in this WG about two years ago.  I strongly
suggest not bringing his disinformation onto this list, even by
reference.

Randy
ltru co-chair

---

From: LB <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:05:12 +0100

I received a copy of the response from the author. I can see that this
is a difficulty of some Anglo-Saxon (United Kingdom, Ireland, US) to
remove themselves from the outdated theories of Chomsky. ISO TC46 has
in fact expressed its disinterest in their proposal to extend the same
mistake with ISO. The important point now is to work together on the
multilinguisrtics discipline (multiple languages parallel usage and
support) to find solutions to maintain interoperability of the IANA
registry with all the other works in line with the WSIS and the
Multilingual Internet.
Sincerely

-- 
LB