<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Hello All,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I do not think that there is anything
requiring correction. There are other instances of macrolanguages in ISO
639-3 that do not exist in Part 2 (much less, Part 1). See [</font><a href="http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=luy"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">luy</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">]
and [</font><a href="http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=kln"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">kln</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">].
The deprecation of [sh] in Part 1, and the retirement of [hbs] from the
predecesor of Part 2 with the split into three individual languages were
actions taken before the notion of "macrolanguage" was in existence
in the 639 standards group. The decision to include [hbs] as a macrolanguage
in Part 3 was a separate decision, taken in 2005 and reiterated in 2007
with the adoption of ISO 639-3.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Best regards,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Joan Spanne<br>
ISO 639-3/RA<br>
SIL International<br>
7500 W Camp Wisdom Rd<br>
Dallas, TX 75236<br>
ISO639-3@sil.org</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td width=40%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>"Doug Ewell"
<doug@ewellic.org></b> </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">2009-06-29 08:04 AM</font>
<td width=59%>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">To</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><ietf-languages@iana.org></font>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">cc</font></div>
<td>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Subject</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: Anomaly in upcoming registry</font></table>
<br>
<table>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td></table>
<br></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring
dot com> wrote:<br>
<br>
>> ... It certainly isn't patently obvious to me that this is a bug
in <br>
>> the draft-4645bis Registry that needs to be fixed.<br>
><br>
> I think no one is suggesting that anything be done to draft-4645bis.
I <br>
> think re-opening 4645bis to make a change of this nature would be
<br>
> inappropriate.<br>
<br>
No, I agree that Mark was not calling to change anything in <br>
draft-4645bis, but rather in the "draft-4645bis Registry" --
the <br>
Registry to be supplied to IANA by draft-4645bis, whose method of <br>
construction is described in draft-4645bis.<br>
<br>
My position is that the change Mark suggests may not be appropriate, and
<br>
is certainly not a <span lang="en-US">slam dunk</span>.
It depends on <br>
our interpretation of draft-4646bis and any priorities it does or <br>
doesn't give to ISO 639-3 over other parts of ISO 639, and it depends on
<br>
whether the relevant RA or JAC decides to correct the inconsistency in
<br>
639 by either (a) reviving "sh" in 639-1 and adding "hbs"
to 639-2, or <br>
(b) withdrawing "hbs" from 639-3.<br>
<br>
I don't see why the philosophical discussion necessarily must wait until
<br>
the new Registry is in force, but if others want to wait, that's fine <br>
with me.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645
* UTN #14<br>
http://www.ewellic.org<br>
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html<br>
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ietf-languages mailing list<br>
Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no<br>
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages<br>
</font></tt>
<br>