"mis" update review request

[Harald Alvestrand]

Mark Davis wrote:
> No, it isn't. We have explicitly at least one code, zxx, that clearly 
> and specifically does not apply to content containing human languages. 
> We have another code "und" which applies to content that may or may 
> not contain human languages. Now, clearly we only want a very small 
> set of codes like this, and may decide that "und" and "zxx" are the 
> only codes that should behave in that way; but it is not an out of 
> scope question.
Be careful about the "we have". ISO 639 has zxx. That doesn't mean that 
4646ter needs to use it.
If I'm using "we" on this list, I mean "the users of 4646ter".
>
> What would be out of scope would be codes for different kinds of 
> binaries (eg JPEG) or codes for different kinds of programming 
> languages (JAVA, CPP).
Agreed.