FYI: ISO 639-5 reconfirmation ballot

John Cowan cowan at
Sat Jul 16 06:23:07 CEST 2016

Peter Constable scripsit:

> So, if nothing else, I think 639-5 should not be withdrawn. Because my
> main concern is BCP 47, I would have no qualms if 639-5 and its code
> table remain unchanged. 

I disagree.

If it were withdrawn, our Registry would remain unchanged.  Our only
obligation with respect to ISO 639-5 is to add any subtags that the RA
(the Library of Congress) should decide to add.  If the RA ceases to
exist, we don't have to do anything.  Certainly we wouldn't remove any
of the codes from the former standard.

So I think we should be neutral on the subject, rather than insisting
that ISO 639-5 must be kept because *in the past* we made a copy of its
code elements.

John Cowan        cowan at
Let's face it: software is crap. Feature-laden and bloated, written under
tremendous time-pressure, often by incapable coders, using dangerous
languages and inadequate tools, trying to connect to heaps of broken or
obsolete protocols, implemented equally insufficiently, running on
unpredictable hardware -- we are all more than used to brokenness.
                   --Felix Winkelmann

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list