Proposed records and registration forms for 639-2 changes (long)

[Doug Ewell]

CE Whitehead wrote:

> These are already in the registry, and the registration changes here 
> involve just a name change, but as M. Lang Gerard has pointed out, 
> these are strange geographic collections.
> No objection is registered by me however; just a note!
> (Of all things that need a comment, I think these qualify.)
> ...
> Again because of the arguments about Turkish and Mongolian do we need 
> a comment?  Or let it be . . . (This is not so critical to me; you can 
> go to SIL and see that this is a family albeit a disputed one)

I am deeply opposed to adding comments to the Registry characterizing 
any of the language collections as "strange," "disputed," or anything of 
the sort.  They are what they are.

These remarks amount to second-guessing the technical decisions made, or 
adopted, by ISO 639-2/RA.  In my opinion, this goes far beyond the 
authority, expertise, or scope of responsibility of the ietf-languages 
list.

You may wish to contact the RA directly at iso639 at dkuug.dk if you feel 
you have the necessary expertise to go down this path.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ