<html 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" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:SimSun;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@SimSun";
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.gmailquote
{mso-style-name:gmail_quote;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
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 link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>It’s my impression that, in MARC, the categories were
considered to be an exception. At this point in ISO 639, I think the
collections cannot be treated as partitions: the additions in 639-3 basically
undermine that assumption. However, it might still be possible to treat the *<b>collections</b>*
as a partition.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>None of that changes the intention of mis in MARC, which I’d
have to say is the same intention in ISO 639: mis is the “else”
case – i.e. none of the other coded categories fits. The problem with mis
is one of maintainability: any time a new entry is added in ISO 639, some
documents tagged with mis may suddenly become inappropriately tagged.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Peter<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Mark Davis
[mailto:mark.davis@icu-project.org] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, April 13, 2007 11:50 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> John Cowan<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Frank Ellermann; LTRU Working Group; ietf-languages@alvestrand.no<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Ltru] Re: "mis" update review request<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>You are right about number one;
I concede that point fully -- I'd overlooked that phrasing, sorry. That means
that in ISO 639-2 the following are collections:<br>
<br>
mul Multiple languages<br>
art Artificial (Other)<br>
<br>
plus more normal cases:<br>
<br>
afa Afro-Asiatic
(Other)<br>
alg Algonquian
languages<br>
...<br>
<br>
and the following are not collections. <br>
<br>
und Undetermined<br>
zxx No linguistic
content<br>
<br>
<br>
I disagree with your point number two. The only reason that I can conclude that
"Miscellaneous Expenses" in a spreadsheet excludes the other listed
categories is that I know that everything listed is intended to be a partition.
The language codes clearly do not form a partition, since some collections
encompass other codes. The collection codes that are tagged with (Other) are
clearly meant to be the remainder of partitions, but for the collections that
are not tagged with (Other) there is no evidence that they were intended to
exclude other cases -- if anything, the contrary -- if they had meant to be the
remainder of partitions, they would have said (Other). <br>
<br>
Moreover, while some may be perfectly willing to have stability go by the
wayside, it is extremely important to us, and that is one of the guiding
principles of and reasons for BCP 47. That means that if I validly and
correctly tag content with "mis", that application cannot be made
incorrect by any future change to BCP 47. That is why we can broaden the
application of codes, but cannot narrow them. There is no evidence in BCP 47
that I cannot correctly tag the content "kind" with "mis".
Now, of course, we all know that we should tag with as much information as we
can, so I *should* tag that with "en" if I know I mean the English
word, and "de" if I mean the German, or possibly others. If I don't
know which one it is, if my protocol allows multiple tags I can use "en,
de", and if not I am forced into a choice between "mul" or
choosing the 'most likely' language of the set. <br>
<br>
Mark<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span class=gmailquote>On 4/13/07, <b>John Cowan</b> <<a
href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org">cowan@ccil.org</a>> wrote:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Mark Davis scripsit:<br>
<br>
> Saying that mis is a collection is not breaking, but also not<br>
> substantiated by ISO 639-2.<br>
<br>
It's just unfathomable to me how you can get that reading of the standard.<br>
<br>
> <a href="http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/normtext.html">http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/normtext.html</a><br>
<br>
which says (section 4.1.1, second sentence):<br>
<br>
The words *languages* or
*(other)* as part of a language name <br>
in the following tables may be
taken to indicate that a language<br>
code is a collective language
code.<br>
<br>
> <a href="http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php">http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
</a><br>
<br>
which says (s.v. "mis")<br>
<br>
Miscellaneous languages<br>
<br>
Note the word *languages*. Game, set, and match (or Q, E, and D).<br>
<br>
<br>
> Saying that "which don't belong to any other collection" is a
breaking <br>
> change, *and* is not substantiated by ISO 639-2 at the time the code was<br>
> added to the registry (or even now).<br>
<br>
Come, come. Do you expect us, the members of this list, to suppose<br>
that when a spreadsheet contains the line "Miscellaneous expenses" <br>
you will find there charges for capital construction or salaries?<br>
You will not. You will find expenses *that do not fit into any<br>
other category* on the spreadsheet.<br>
<br>
--<br>
One art / There
is John
Cowan < <a href="mailto:cowan@ccil.org">cowan@ccil.org</a>><br>
No less / No
more
<a href="http://www.ccil.org/~cowan">http://www.ccil.org/~cowan</a><br>
All things / To do<br>
With sparks / Galore
-- Douglas Hofstadter <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
<br clear=all>
<br>
-- <br>
Mark <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>