Hoi,
The RFC4646 is even more restrictive then the ISO-639-3. This RFC is imho of
little value for our purposes. I think what you have written demonstrates
that you do not know that much about the subject.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 4:03 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling(a)wikimedia.org>wrote;wrote:
Jesse Plamondon-Willard wrote:
The community draft for a language proposal
policy stagnates while
some complain fashionably about the lack of community involvement in
the approval process (and the subcommittee unfairness/conspiracy/evil
thereof). If you're interested enough to comment on the policy on
mailing lists, please comment on or edit the community draft.
>
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Language_proposal_policy/Community_draft
>
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta_talk:Language_proposal_policy/Community…
Fair comment. I have edited the community draft as per the opinions
expressed by several people on this list:
Diff:
<
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta%3ALanguage_proposal_policy…
Permalink:
<
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Language_proposal_policy/C…
-- Tim Starling
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l