Leif Halvard Silli <lhs at malform dot no> wrote: > In that regard: Do you think that it is possible that extlang in > itself could be misperceived by ISO? Could the ISO think that LTRU > *wants* them to define Macrolanguaes, which then would become extlang > tagged - or something like that? Or, could ISO begin wanting to > interfer with this group, or perhaps refrain from defining > macrolanguages, picking other methods for grouping languages, because > they don't like the extlang tagging that it leads to? I think ISO 639-3/RA assigns code elements for 7700 languages in the best way they know how, and doesn't make a single decision -- not one -- on the basis of what LTRU will or won't do. I'm one of apparently few people who truly believe the ISO 639-3/RA definition of "macrolanguage," and don't think of it as some kind of cover story. -- Doug Ewell * Arvada, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://www.ewellic.org http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www.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.