This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Comment 2 of the i18nCore comments: http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0606-its/ "We recommend that you say, BCP 47 instead of RFC 3066bis. We also strongly recommend that you add the phrase "or its successor" after reference to RFC 3066bis or BCP 47, since RFC3066bis is expected to become obsolete soon after it is released (to make way for RFC 3066ter)."
Resolution: working group agreed with the proposal at http://www.w3.org/2006/07/19-i18nits-minutes.html#item10 . Action: editors to make the change.
Corresponding link might need to be updated. What's the URL to RFC 3066bis?
action: Felix to ask Addison for the correct reference to BCP 47
Wait: response sent. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0295.html .
Closed. Commenters satisfied see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0362.html
Summary: The Working Group decided to accept the proposal and to change the reference for language identification.