Re: [psg.com #952] how to determine whether an ISO 639 registration request has been processed?

On 01:41 12/05/2005, Randy Presuhn said:
>Doug's response about "treachery and skulduggery" was unhelpful, but 
>understandable in light of Jefsey's patently offensive initial comment. 
>(number 23 in http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg00540.html )

The comment is correct. It may be Franglishly awkward, but itis not 
offensive. It says that the MUST is inadequate because its procedure of 
application is not documented. It then say how the MUST and the lack of 
procedure will be understood (because this is the way it was understood by 
_every_ of the five reviewers I called upon. It was also a point which 
really upset them).

Anyway, I am sure that if that comment was patently offensive, the Chairs 
would have clarified the issue with me before broadcasting it as 
#952.  This point is obviously out of a Draft non replacing RFC 3066 and 
does not prevent consens on that case. This point is an absolute blocking 
factor as is language treatment disparity.
jfc