> From: Frank Ellermann [mailto:nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de] > Confusing is one thing, but two different language > codes with the same description would be *broken*. > > 3066 and 4646 went to great lengths that this is > not possible, including a promise from ISO in the > text. Whate are you referring to? I am not aware that IETF requested any promises from ISO wrt descriptions. > The SIL pages claim that the description for "sw" > is "Swahili (macrolanguage)". The 4646 registry > claims that it's "Swahili", at least one of them > is wrong. SIL's pages in relation to this entry in ISO 639-3 are not wrong wrt ISO 639. I cannot comment generally on whether that info is considered appropriate in relation to some application of ISO 639; that is entirely beyond the scope of ISO 639. Peter
_______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.