Registration forms for description changes
dewell at adelphia.net
Sat Jun 17 21:00:07 CEST 2006
Kent Karlsson <kentk at cs dot chalmers dot se> wrote:
> As it stands, the entry for 'den' in the registry is ok. But the
> spelling for 'Slave' has been changed to 'Slavey'.
The listing on the ISO 639-2/RA Web site is "Slave (Athapascan)".
The Description fields in the Registry were taken directly from existing
ISO standards whenever possible.
It is true that "Slavey" has been proposed as a replacement spelling
(Wikipedia says "the change" has already been made), both to encourage
correct pronunciation and to remove the false association with slavery.
ISO 639-3 lists "Slavey, North" and "Slavey, South" as individual
languages under a macrolanguage which is still called "Slave
It may be appropriate to consider "Slavey" as an additional Description
field, and Kent or anyone else is welcome to submit it as a
modification, but this is a separate issue from ASCII fallbacks and
splitting compound names.
> More significantly the "(Athapascan)" part is NOT an alternative name;
> instead it is unique in the regitry for explicitly indicating the
> language family of 'den'. So the PROPOSED new entry for 'den' is
I agree completely with Kent on this one, and withdraw my proposal to
split this description into "Slave" and "Athapascan."
Fullerton, California, USA
More information about the Ietf-languages