Doug Ewell scripsit:
> Arrggh. I hate all this cherry-picking, even though it seems to be our
> only path to internal agreement: no extlangs except for 'zh-*' (and
> maybe 'sgn-*' and 'ar-*', we can't decide), no more ISO 639-1 codes even
> if ISO assigns them, add ISO 639-5 codes except for these five.
I should point out that these six are a subset of the ones that 639-5
calls out as possibly problematic. The other three they footnote have
to do with a dispute about whether "Caucasian" is a genetic grouping
or not, but we don't care about whether collections are genetic, areal,
name-based, or what.
> I should add the one where we add ISO 3166 exceptionally reserved codes
> except 'UK', which is actually an exception to an exception. At least
> that one is based on a rule we already have about not adding exact
> duplicates at registration time; it applies the rule to RFC 4645bis
> publication time as well. Still, it is yet another exception from the
> ISO standards.
What would be the point of having a separate standard from ISO if we didn't
deviate from it from time to time? :-)
--
John Cowan cowan at ccil.org http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Most people are much more ignorant about language than they are about
[other subjects], but they reckon that because they can talk and read and
write, their opinions about talking and reading and writing are as well
informed as anybody's. And since I have DNA, I'm entitled to carry on at
length about genetics without bothering to learn anything about it. Not.
--Mark Liberman
_______________________________________________
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.