Subject: Re: [Ltru] Land Dayak languages

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 19:50:06 -0600

John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> replied to Kent Karlsson:

>> There is a whole bunch of similar changes (mostly making/clarifying 
>> that the code (is) a collection code, except for Carib) listed in the 
>> change log, done at about the same time:
>
> Yes, I think that's the relevant set of changes.

But this list doesn't reflect the discrepancies between the 
begged/borrowed/blackmailed (though apparently accurate) 639-5 list and 
the freely available 639-2 and -3 lists.  All of the "Name change to 
denote collection" changes in Kent's list, except for 'day' as reported 
earlier, are correctly identified in 639-5 as collections.

My current list of discrepancies is as follows:

1. Identified as collections in 639-3 but not present at all in -5:

bh  - Bihari
day - Land Dayak languages
him - Himachali

These must be retained in draft-4645bis because they are in the existing 
Registry.  I assume they should all be marked "Scope: collection".

2. Identified as an individual language in 639-2 and -3 but as a 
collection in -5:

car - Galibi Carib ("Carib languages" in -5)

I need guidance from the WG on what to do here.  The answer might be 
"wait until ISO 639 resolves it," which could be an indefinite wait 
although Peter says they should resolve it ASAP.  Or, it might be to 
pick either the -2/-3 individual name and denotation, or the -5 
collection denotation.

Everything else I need for draft-4645bis seems clear at this point --  
particularly the decision to deprecate "zh-cmn" in favor of "cmn" 
instead of the other way around -- but the draft is blocked until these 
discrepancies are settled.

--
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: Peter Constable <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 22:53:44 -0700

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

> These must be retained in draft-4645bis...

> pick either the -2/-3 individual name and denotation, or the -5

I will do what I can to get a commitment from the -5 RA to the effect that these will be resolved in a manner consistent with -2/-3 prior to the -5 being published online.

In any event, only 'car' is really problematic for us here.

Peter