Dear Scott,
from various mails of yours I understand that:
- you will propose the IESG to consider the nomination of the RFC
3066 Bis IETF Language Subtag Reviewer (under appeal) on March 2nd.
- you privately approached the RFC 3066 Langage Tag Reviewer for the
job. He disclosed it.
- you would also consider other candidates.
I probably missed the call for nominations. I therefore wish to
nominate myself.
I started dealing with networked language issues for the world
digital ecosystem in 1980, considering the international support of
Videotex diacritics. I was involved in Katakana technical support
from 1983. I am interested in computer assisted and networked
languages modes, the main issues the IETF should consider. I am
involved in multilingualisation (the equal support of every language
by technology) for years. I underline that the Language Subtag
Reviewer requirements by RFC 3066 Bis are not mainly oriented towards
languages and scripts (which must follow the ISO policy). I suppose
everyone knows that I am particularly informed of the RFC 3066 Bis
related issues.
Disclosure of possible Conflicts of Interest.
1. I am an individual Member of the Unicode consortium.
2. I maintain an experimental inclusive language coding elements
registry ("langroot") for cross referencing the various language
coding registries and counting around of 35.000 elements.
3. I am one of the authors of the Language Equal Opportunity
Introductory Declaration (http://nicso.org/equilang.htm) and I want
the Internet to equally support every languages as it does for
English and to support every public and private language coding
system, as it does for ISO.
Comments.
I shared in the WG-LTRU where I proposed different solutions for the
administration of the ietf-languages@xxxxxxxx mailing list. Its RFC
3066 Bis Draft says that the Language Subtag Reviewer is to moderate
it. Several persons have requested that the reviewer's role be
separated from the administrator's duties.
I wish to respect the WG consensus. But if the consensus changed and
if the administration role was to be delegated, I consider that the
administration of a iana.org list belongs to the IANA. IMHO this
would protect the Language Subtag and Extension Registries from the
problems we faced with the Language Tag Registry.
My policy would be inclusive, to support interoperability with all
the other language code registry. And to timely and actively support
all the innovations the WG-LTRU has foreseen to that end. I would
obviously pay the utmost attention to the Language Subtag Extension
Registry
http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-tag-extensions-registry and
to the all the interests it may raise.
To illustrate my position, using cases recently discussed, I would
start in accepting the current ISO updates and every codes in the ISO
3166 lists. I am interested in territory's internet communities, not
in territory adminstrative/political situation. This would start with
"EU" code for the European Union, and "Japn" for the group of scripts
usually found in Japanese documents.
Jean-François C. Morfin
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf