Re: The "QU" territory/region code (was New Public Review Issue: #116 Proposed Update UTS #35 LDML)

On 11/7/07, Philippe Verdy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Mark Davis wrote:
> > This is a misreading of the text. One of the reasons for the last
> > revision of BCP 47 was to make it absolutely clear when codes were
> > valid or not. The valid codes are all and only those that are in
> > http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry. EU is not
> > there (as a region), thus it is not valid.
>
> Note that your URL is NOT directly referenced by [BCP47], and the
> terminology used cannot clearly state that fact. So it is not so clear in
> the [BCP47] text, as you could use any table shown in the ISO 3166-1/MA
> website. Note that [BCP47] does not even list [ISO3166-1] as a normative
> reference, and not even as an informative reference (most probably this
> was
> forgotten)!
>
> Anyway, the text in [ISO3166-1] allows the Unicode Consortium to request
> to
> the ISO 3166-1/MA an authorization to use the "exceptionnally reserved" in
> LDML and CLDR, even if there's still no agreement without BCP47 (what the
> IETF wants to restrict for BCP47 would be immediately invalidated by any
> authorization made by the ISO 3166-1/MA).
>
> That's why I finished my message with this question: did you request such
> authorization to the ISO 3166-1/MA?
>
>
>
>


-- 
Mark