[Ltru] 'car' in different ISO 639 parts
petercon at microsoft.com
Mon Jun 9 19:47:09 CEST 2008
> From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan at ccil.org]
> > This is an inconsistency in ISO 639 that the JAC should resolve: 639-
> > is giving a very different denotation from -2/-3 -- a collection
> > versus individual-language scope -- which is something that should
> > never happen.
> It would be good if the JAC could expedite this.
I have raised the issue.
> Does the provision for "rest groups" in 639-5 and their treatment as
> full families mean that the effort to remove "(Other)" in 639-2 is a
> dead letter now?
I'm guessing it might.
More information about the Ietf-languages