Registration request: "mis" comment clarifying meaning

Michael Everson everson at
Fri May 11 19:00:38 CEST 2007

In my opinion it is the business of ISO 639 to define or clarify the 
meaning of its three-letter tags. It is not our business to do so.

I volunteered John Cowan to be Consensus Taker for this, but have not 
heard from him. However, it seems out of scope to me and I think the 
request should be rejected.

At 18:38 +0200 2007-05-11, Frank Ellermann wrote:
>I've posted the last update of the "mis" template in
>about four weeks ago.  The discussion about it ended,
>and the latest 4646bis draft covers "mis" (among other
>obscure language tags) in section 4.1 point 4 as #5:
>In essence it says "SHOULD NOT be used" and matches
>the proposed comment, see below.
>~~~ cut ~~~
>1. Name of requester:                   Frank Ellermann
>2. E-mail address of requester:         nobody at
>3. Record Requested:
>    Type:                                language
>    Subtag:                              mis
>    Description:                         Miscellaneous Languages
>    Comments:                            A collection of unrelated languages
>                                         which don't belong to any other
>                                         ISO 639 collection
>4. Intended meaning of the subtag:      n/a (no change)
>5. Reference to published description
>    of the language (book or article):
>6. Any other relevant information:      n/a (comment added)
>Ietf-languages mailing list
>Ietf-languages at

Michael Everson *

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list