[Ltru] Collection tags considered problematic (was: "mis" update review request)

[Peter Constable]

I have not forgotten bih and him; they are among the last handful of issues I intend to present to the JAC for some resolution to complete the integration of the Ethnologue 15 inventory with the existing inventory of ISO 639-2. I am simply waiting for them to wrap up decision regarding Aramaic varieties, and then Tibetan before I present the short list of remaining issues, all have to do with South Asian varieties.


Peter



-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan at ccil.org]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:07 PM
To: Peter Constable
Cc: ietf-languages at alvestrand.no; ltru at lists.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Collection tags considered problematic (was: "mis" update review request)

Peter Constable scripsit:

> At one point early in our involvement with ISO 639, Gary Simons and
> I suggested that the collections be given extensional definitions,
> as has been done with macrolanguages (in the macrolanguage mapping
> table). But as our interest was in coverage for individual languages
> and no in the collections, we didn't take any interest in pursuing
> either evaluating the merits or getting that implemented.

Your obsolete-but-still-interesting cut at that is still online at
www.ethnologue.com/14/iso639 .

Reminder: in addition to replacing "(Other)" with "languages", 'bih' and
'him' should be updated to add "languages".

--
Cash registers don't really add and subtract;           John Cowan
        they only grind their gears.                    cowan at ccil.org
But then they don't really grind their gears, either;
        they only obey the laws of physics.  --Unknown