ISO 639-5 reconfirmation ballot (long)

[Doug Ewell]

I wrote:

>> To be able to provide this, all nodes in the hierarchy, all
>> languages, all dialects, would by assigned atomic, semi-mnemonic,
>> non-transferable four-letter codes.
>
> This sounds exactly like ISO 639-6. Why was that standard withdrawn,
> then?

Actually, ISO 639-6 used existing three-letter codes for languages when 
possible, and assigned four-letter codes for groupings (moving up the 
tree) and dialects and other variants (moving down the tree).

So the only difference is that Caoimhín's system would use four-letter 
codes uniformly. It seems that 639-6 actually would have been a better 
fit for Anthony's use case of being able to identify an individual 
language code at sight.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org