<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2995" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Cambria Math;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Calibri;
}
@page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; }
P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 11pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"
}
LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 11pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 11pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.EmailStyle17 {
COLOR: windowtext; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-style-type: personal-compose
}
.MsoChpDefault {
mso-style-type: export-only
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
</STYLE>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=purple link=blue>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=019293012-21122006>All
ISO 639 alpha-3 language identifiers belong to one code-space. Following the
publication of ISO 639-3 and 639-5 some important changes are expected, due to
both "internal" concerns in ISO/TC 37 and developments in ISO
centrally.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=019293012-21122006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=019293012-21122006>The
ISO 639 series will in some not very distant future be published as a "Standard
as database". The exact format is still to be decided, but a couple of things
are certain: (1) The "format" of ISO 639 (including the division into parts)
will change. (2) The administrative routines around ISO 639 will
change.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=019293012-21122006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=019293012-21122006>All
this means that it may not be too fruitful to discuss the relationship between
the parts of ISO 639 at this time. However, one concept that is being developed
in this context is the notion of "defined subsets". The current ISO 639-2 may
become the first defined subset. Other subsets may be registered in the future,
both as International Standards and as "private subsets". The mechanisms for
these registrations will need to be worked out.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=019293012-21122006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=019293012-21122006>More
information about this will be circulated as soon as things get more sorted
out.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=019293012-21122006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=019293012-21122006>Best
regards</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=019293012-21122006>Håvard
Hjulstad</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Arial
size=2><EM>--------------------</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2><EM>Håvard Hjulstad</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
href="mailto:hhj@standard.no"><EM>mailto:hhj@standard.no</EM></A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Arial
size=2><EM>--------------------</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=no dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no
[mailto:ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Don
Osborn<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, December 21, 2006 1:20 PM<BR><B>To:</B> 'IETF
Languages Discussion'<BR><B>Subject:</B> Framing the Alpha-3
turf<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal>A quick question re the foreseen relationship among
ISO-639-2, -3, and -5 in defining Alpha-3 language codes:<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>To what extent is ISO-639-2 being “absorbed” into 639-3? I
realize that the latter has harmonized its alpha-3’s wrt the former, a process
out of which came “macrolanguages” and the recent redefinitions in 639-2 that
Doug discovered. I ask because (a) in another context (linguistics) I heard the
opinion that ISO-639-1&2 are already no longer useful (one minor reason
being that some -2 codes are being written in -3), and (b) one is aware that
current recommendations in ICT use that where languages have ISO-639-1 & 2
codes, that the former (alpha-2) codes are to be used, which of course implies
that at least part 1 has a future.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Another question I have is in terms of “nesting” of language
codes – if everything is defined in part 3, then some of the codes are by
definition of a higher order than others (perhaps analogous to the bibliographic
and terminology division of part 2, except that they would have a hierarchical
relationship – if these reading is correct).<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Complicating the picture, perhaps, is the use of the same
alpha-3 space for ISO-639-5. Effectively there would be in principle three
sets of lists of alpha-3 codes and three RAs dealing with the alpha-3 space
(communicating, coordinating, etc. as necessary). This is not a criticism in any
way, as such shared responsibilities and overlapping jurisdictions, if you will,
can be functional and sometimes even preferable. Mainly, though I’m trying to
understand it better, and as I do, wonder if important actors in the allied
fields (ICT, localization, linguistics, various projects) are not also somewhat
hazy on what the plans are (or are laboring under misperceptions of the
situation).<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I’ve waded through part of RFC-4646 but am not sure that it
addresses this kind of issue. Thanks in advance.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Don Osborn<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Bisharat.net<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>PanAfrican Localisation
project<o:p></o:p></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>