Re: [Ltru] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-06.txt -- Editorial Comments Only

["Doug Ewell" <doug at ewellic.org>]

CE Whitehead <cewcathar at hotmail dot com> wrote:

> {COMMENT:  I would like to add here at the beginning of this -- if 
> possible -- a bit more information on when you follow ISO 639-3 and 
> when you follow ISO 639-5;  it appear to me from reading the draft 
> (correct me if I am wrong; I may be) that, where ISO639-3 differs from 
> ISO639-5 , it is ISO639-3 that is the basis of the codes in the 
> registry; however codes in ISO 639-5 not listed in ISO639-3 appear in 
> the registry as they are listed in ISO639-5  }

I think the only code element defined in both 639-3 and 639-5 is 'car', 
which 639-5 defined as a collective called "Carib languages" even though 
639-2 and 639-3 already had it as an individual called "Galibi Carib." 
The registrars for 639-2 and 639-3 (Rebecca and Joan respectively) 
clarified back in August that the "individual" interpretation is the 
correct one, and draft-4645bis-06 makes note of that in Section 2.3, 
sixth paragraph.

There should not be any other code elements shared between 639-3 and 
639-5.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC ��������Ȟ��9����z۫��k��.�Ǭ���:���v�N�m���zg�j��'�~��b��:"z�������������d^q���mv����,�]��[�+{v��W(���a#>'v�����rݴ�}׍�ӽ4<4����v�N�m�����`ޖ+ޭ�[k��{v��W(��z+��jXh��q�a��۽4ռ����jk%r�����"�13�}�Q7~�嶻����jk%r������5�N�]X��Ĝjy����+������]*Z�YZ�ӗJ��I�{my�b޽���J֭����