"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