Suggestion: registration of variant subtags for Aluku, Ndyuka, and Pamaka (Suriname/French Guiana English-based Creoles)
petercon at microsoft.com
Sat Jan 24 22:39:46 CET 2009
It is *not* possible to change the ID of an already-encoded category, so requesting such a change is definitely not worth pursuing. Changing the name without changing the semantic is possible, however, and changes to a semantic are possible with restrictions so as to avoid causing existing usage to become invalid.
From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of CE Whitehead
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 2:59 PM
To: ietf-languages at iana.org
Subject: RE: Suggestion: registration of variant subtags for Aluku, Ndyuka, and Pamaka (Suriname/French Guiana English-based Creoles)
As far as I understand, it is possible to change the ISO639-3 codes and language names (Joan Span's posting has just reminded me of this), but you are right; I do not think a change to the code itself would be worth pursuing; if you wished to add additional names however, that would be fine:
The types of changes that are possible are to:
1. modify the reference information for an existing code element (reference name and additional names, language type. language scope or relationship to a macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/macrolanguages.asp> grouping).
2. retire a code element from use, including merging its scope of denotation into that of another code.
3. split an existing code element into two or more separate language code elements.
4. create a new code element for a previously unidentified language.
And we can still approve the variant subtags (once RFC 4646 is published? Is that the consensus?)
--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com<mailto:cewcathar at hotmail.com>
> From: pascal.vaillant at guyane.univ-ag.fr
> To: cewcathar at hotmail.com; ietf-languages at iana.org
> Subject: Re: Suggestion: registration of variant subtags for Aluku, Ndyuka, and Pamaka (Suriname/French Guiana English-based Creoles)
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:06:48 -0300
> Le Friday 23 January 2009, vous avez écrit :
> > Hi, the information at Wikipedia & Ethnologue suggests that M. Vaillant is
> > correct; these seem to be three dialects.
> > But I am not familiar with these either.
> Actually my request reflects the view of a group of specialists
> in my research lab, CELIA, which is specialized in the field
> (http://celia.cnrs.fr). Two of them wrote one of the bibliographical
> references cited. The Ethnologue catalogue edited by the SIL
> which is the ground on which the ISO 639-3 standard is based,
> also considers the three varieties as dialects of a same language,
> not as languages of a same macro-language. The disagreement between
> specialists would rather lie in one detail, namely the mnemonic
> chosen to name that language : 'djk' (language tag chosen by
> the SIL) is a reminder of Djuka, which is but one variety of
> the language (though the most numerous). But this is not a matter
> to be discussed here, I suppose.
> Pascal Vaillant
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages