Print

Print


I agree that "ftp://" is entirely different from "ftp.wikipedia.org". But I still don't think that we should abandon stability because a Web site, even Wikipedia, chooses to mix ISO 639 IDs in the same distribution position with "www" and "ftp" as sub-domain names. If ISO 3166 were to go changing their IDs (alpha 2 or alpha 3) for such reasons, we would rightly criticize them for not being stable. Same with other standards.


Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Everson
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2011 2:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ISO-639 code 'www'

On 22 Jul 2011, at 18:38, Peter Constable wrote:

> I agree with Havard completely. And I do not think that Michael has refuted any of my points.  (He had said, 'Peter's example "ftp://" is not relevant', though I was basically saying the same thing: that labels appearing in those protocol elements are not a problem.)

ftp:// is entirely different from ftp.wikipedia.org

www:// is meaningless in every context.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/