Subject: RE: [Ltru] [semi-OT] ISO 639-3, record-jars, and Boontling

From: "Peter Constable" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:31:17 -0800

> From: John Cowan [mailto:[email-masked]]

> > Clarification: in ISO-speak: it is at Enquiry Draft stage.
> 
> The ISO page on it says it's out for DIS ballot.  Is that wrong?

No; an Equiry Draft (actually, that's ISO/IEC-speak) is also know in ISO
as a DIS.

Peter Constable

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: "Peter Constable" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 22:44:54 -0800

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On
> Behalf Of Randy Presuhn

> However, I wonder if the approach of mandating the use of the macro-
> language
> code in some, but not all, cases will make matching algorithms overly
> complicated.

ISO 639-3 will include normative mappings between macrolanguage IDs and
the individual-language IDs that they encompass. The availability of
those mappings should make it easier to get parsers and matchers to
handle this.

An important consideration, though, is how to deal with changes in ISO
639-3 such as the introduction of new macro-language IDs. (I don't know
that new macrolanguage IDs would ever be added, but I can't predict that
it will never happen.) Issues of that nature would need to be
incorporated into the text of whatever RFC were to incorporate ISO 639-3
and implement the extlang subtag.

Peter Constable