Subject: [Ltru] Editor's copy of draft-4645bis-06

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:33:15 -0600

I've just posted an editor's copy of draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-06.  Follow 
the links from here to find your favorite version for reviewing:

http://www.ewellic.org/rfc4645bis.html

The draft-06 links are on the right.

There are a lot of changes from draft-05 here (extlangs, ISO 639-5, 
Scope field), so please take a look at this and make comments.

--
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
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: "Kent Karlsson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:05:00 +0200

> Scope field), so please take a look at this and make comments.

1) File production issue: There is some garbage text at the end of
http://www.ewellic.org/lstreg-4646bis-draft-06.txt.

2) Not an LTRU issue, but 639-2 has the approach of having the word
"languages" (or "other") in the descriptions for collection codes.
However, the following two collection codes do not have the word
"languages" (nor "other") in their descriptions:

Subtag:bh	Description:Bihari	Added:2005-10-16	Scope:collection
Subtag:him	Description:Himachali	Added:2005-10-16	Scope:collection

	/kent k

---

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 11:10:36 -0600

> http://www.ewellic.org/lstreg-4646bis-draft-06.txt.

These two lines are added by my Web hosting provider, GoDaddy, as part 
of the mechanism they use to add banner ads to my HTML pages.  They are, 
of course, useless for text files, but if I ask GoDaddy to fix the 
problem, they will probably tell me to upgrade from free hosting to paid 
hosting.

I'll add zipped files, which I don't think will be adulterated, and a 
disclaimer about the garbage at the end of the unzipped files.

> Subtag:him Description:Himachali Added:2005-10-16 Scope:collection

As you said, this isn't an LTRU issue; we use the exact ISO 639 names, 
and document where we don't.  I checked, and both 639-2 and 639-3 call 
these "Bihari" and "Himachali".  I wonder if this is one reason why 
639-5 missed them.

---

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:53:56 -0400

> these "Bihari" and "Himachali".  I wonder if this is one reason why 

Probably.  It was the 639-3 analysis (in fact, Peter Constable's) who
showed that these names represented not languages but collections.
See http://www.ethnologue.com/14/show_iso639.asp?code=bih and
http://www.ethnologue.com/14/show_iso639.asp?code=him for details.
This set of URLs is an excellent set of resources showing the (sometimes
obsolete) 639-3 view of various 639-2 codes.

-- 
Newbies always ask:                             John Cowan
  "Elements or attributes?                      http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Which will serve me best?"                      [email-masked]
  Those who know roar like lions;
  Wise hackers smile like tigers.                   --a tanka, or extended haiku
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:21:48 -0600

John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:

>> "Bihari" and "Himachali"
> This set of URLs is an excellent set of resources showing the 
> (sometimes obsolete) 639-3 view of various 639-2 codes.

Excellent they are.  Among other things, they show those of us who don't 
know Indian languages that the "-i" ending in "Bihari" and "Himachali" 
essentially means "languages."  This implies that any proposal to change 
these descriptions to "Bihari languages" and "Himachali languages" 
should first be reviewed by the Subcommittee on Redundancy Subcommittee.

---

From: "Kent Karlsson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:56:19 +0200

> should first be reviewed by the Subcommittee on Redundancy 

Even if that interpretation of "Himachali" and "Bihari" is true (which I
doubt a bit, they look like inflections rather than composite words; I guess
"Bihari people" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bihari_people) does not mean
"Bihar languages people"...), that does not prevent the expressions "Himachal
languages" and  "Bihar languages" which conforms to the 639-2 rule (for
good or bad)...

	/kent k

---

From: Peter Constable <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:06:49 -0700

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
> Doug Ewell

> essentially means "languages."

Not in the slightest.

The "-i" ending in "X-i" means 'language of region X'. References to "Bihari" (as for Himachali, Rajasthani, etc.) are references to what were assumed to be a distinct language associated with a particular region; but more careful investigation leads to the realization that there are many different languages spoken in the region with no one of them predominant over all others. That is why I analyzed them at that time as collections -- an analysis which stuck in ISO 639-3, even though ISO 639-2 was not updated to align.

(That lack of alignment is an oversight that needs to be corrected. It probably didn't happen because it was deemed a collection for purposes of 639-3 and so excluded from 639-3, while attention on alignment issues was given mainly to cases of things included in both 639-3 and 639-2.)

Peter