Well, I was thinking that since it was a formal request we should have a
formal ballot. And in that case we already know that a number of us will
vote no on principle so that it won't pass. You get a proposal, you weigh
the proposal and you vote even if the outcome is clear. But, on the other
hand, the procedures say that the registration authority receives the
request and reviews whether it meets established criteria. It is not
entirely clear what established criteria is other than the number of
documents in the language (that specified at:)

In this case it is ISO 639-1/RA that would consider it. So one could
certainly argue that looking at our principles document 639-1/RA could
decide that it doesn't meet criteria and send it back to the requestor
without a ballot. I have routinely done that when requests are submitted
without the necessary evidence of 50 documents.

So I think one could argue either way at this point and I don't have
strong feelings about whether we have a ballot (assuming that it isn't
approved, which it logically shouldn't be). I do have strong feelings that
we shouldn't make an exception to the principle.


On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Michael Everson wrote:

> Rebecca, how can you have a ballot when the answer is supposed to be no?
> The principles aren't advice. Internet language-tagging relies on the
> agreement.
> --
> Michael Everson *** Everson Typography ***