"mis" update review request
John Cowan
cowan at ccil.org
Fri Apr 13 19:50:40 CEST 2007
Mark Davis scripsit:
> Saying that mis is a collection is not breaking, but also not
> substantiated by ISO 639-2.
It's just unfathomable to me how you can get that reading of the standard.
> http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/normtext.html
which says (section 4.1.1, second sentence):
The words *languages* or *(other)* as part of a language name
in the following tables may be taken to indicate that a language
code is a collective language code.
> http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
which says (s.v. "mis")
Miscellaneous languages
Note the word *languages*. Game, set, and match (or Q, E, and D).
> Saying that "which don't belong to any other collection" is a breaking
> change, *and* is not substantiated by ISO 639-2 at the time the code was
> added to the registry (or even now).
Come, come. Do you expect us, the members of this list, to suppose
that when a spreadsheet contains the line "Miscellaneous expenses"
you will find there charges for capital construction or salaries?
You will not. You will find expenses *that do not fit into any
other category* on the spreadsheet.
--
One art / There is John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org>
No less / No more http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
All things / To do
With sparks / Galore -- Douglas Hofstadter
More information about the Ietf-languages
mailing list