> From: ltru-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Doug Ewell > The ISO definition is a "cover story" if it is simply an attempt at a > legitimate-sounding explanation for what is really, under the surface, > a > kludge. I think if the RA really felt they were a kludge, they would > have come out and said so (perhaps using a more dignified term than > "kludge"). Some of the particular cases that ended up as macrolanguages in ISO 639-3 may be kludgy, having been influenced by some ad hoc prior practices. The notion of macrolanguage, though, is not a kludge: it reflects realities. Those may be realities of practical usage in ICTs rather than realities of common linguistic expression, but they are realities all the same. > Note, once again, that this is not an argument for or against extlang. Indeed. Peter _______________________________________________ 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.