Auriongx (was: Re: Reminder: ISO 639-3 changes are coming)

[Doug Ewell]

Several people commented on this between 1:00 and 4:00 Saturday morning, 
Denver time, and for whatever reason I hadn't replied yet.

There's nothing wrong with inventing your own language; lots of people 
have tried their hand at this.  But until Auriongx is reasonably stable 
and not merely "under development," and until reasonable and specific 
references can be found in libraries or online, not merely by pointing 
to the root of a personal Web site (where I still couldn't find a 
reference to the language even after 10 minutes of prowling around), it 
is still a personal project, a hobby, and not at all a serious candidate 
for being "endowed" (Stefan Reissmann's word) with an ISO 639-3 code 
element.

This is why it is so great that ISO 639-3/RA has an open, public review 
process, and why experts should be taking advantage of it and 
contributing their independent knowledge.  The time to notice and object 
to proposals like Auriongx is when they are under review, not after they 
have been encoded.

Incidentally, to the extent this is meaningful to the ISO 639-3/RA 
process, the "two" supporters of this proposal (Reissmann and Urion 
Argador) are in fact the same person.  Developing an alter ego isn't the 
generally accepted way to drum up additional supporters.

If the RA wants a more formal argument against request 2009-070, I'll be 
happy to compose one.

--
Doug Ewell  |  Thornton, Colorado, USA  |  http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14  |  ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s ­