On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:46:52 EST, Bruce Lilly said: > Accessibility has not been a problem for this implementor (who, > incidentally, was unaware of this draft until the New > Last Call). ISO 639 language code lists are readily available in > HTML-ized English and French via > http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/englangn.html > and > http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/frenchlangn.html > ISO 3166 country code lists are readily available in plain text > in English and French via > http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/iso3166ma/02iso-3166-code-lists/list-en1-semic.txt > and > http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/iso3166ma/02iso-3166-code-lists/list-fr1-semic.txt > > The ISO registered code lists are freely available at the URIs > given above. This implementor has used those URIs for years > without difficulty. The ISO standards themselves are not free, > but neither are they required for an implementor to identify > the valid codes -- the free lists suffice for that purpose. I'm certainly belaboring the obvious (in that the standards in question are basically useless unless at least this subset of information is freely accessible so everybody uses the same values), but is there any statement from the ISO side that this state of affairs (or equivalent access) is going to continue for at least the code lists we need? (I'd not even ask, except this seems to be the month we spend time worrying about explosive bolts attached to our *own* infrastructure - seems to be a good time to worry about institutional insanity on the part of a totally separate standards organization.. ;)
Attachment:
pgpUzbuP3jxiT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf