proposed ISO 639 change for "arn"

Milos Rancic millosh at
Mon Dec 10 20:16:49 CET 2012

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Philip Newton <philip.newton at> wrote:
> On 10 December 2012 18:07, Peter Constable <petercon at> wrote:
>> I’m curious to know what people here think about this case?
> Sometimes language names are updated if it turns out that that was not
> the best name -- whether it was spelled sub-optimally or perhaps had
> entirely the wrong name. But the identifier tends to stay stable.
> I would have expected this to be the case here, as well. Much as "GB"
> stands for the United Kingdom (not just the part of it that is called
> "Great Britain"), I would expect "arn" to continue to mean Mapudungun
> regardless of how well or badly chosen the symbol was initially.

But "GB" is not a derivative of the name treated as offensive.

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list