Regarding the message below from Rebecca about the code for Croatian,
I think we should wait for an official request before doing any
changes, although we could certainly discuss it in anticipation of a
request. I think we also need to consider the impact on databases
that are not easily updated. Is it better to split the material
(which I view as an impediment to access) or to consent to a change
for political reasons and thus end the constant complaints?--Milicent
Wewerka
>>> "Rebecca S. Guenther" <[log in to unmask]> 05/26 4:12 PM >>>
ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee members:
At the Library of Congress we have been getting numerous requests to
change the language code for Croatian in the MARC language code list.
In
some cases the requestor has confused the code and the language
name.
Previously we used the term "Serbo-Croatian (Roman)" for the code
"scr".
We have changed it in our new edition of the MARC language codes to
"Croatian". Sometimes when we have responded that the language name
has
indeed changed, the requestor has been satisfied, but at other times,
they
insist on changing the code because it is based on "Serbo-Croatian,
Roman". However we do try to point out that the code is not intended
to
be an abbreviation for the language and that we try not to change
codes
because of the impact on our systems.
At our meeting in February we considered the principles for the
maintenance of ISO 639, and we all agreed that we would generally
not
change language codes. The standard says the following:
"To ensure continuity and stability, codes shall only be changed for
compelling reasons."
As we continue to discuss this issue here, I would like to ask the
members
of this committee their opinion as to whether the request to change
"scr"
to "hrv" is a compelling change that we should consider. The
requests
generally speak about the Croatian language as having a long history;
they
consider a Serbo-Croatian a language forced on them. We do want the
MARC
and ISO lists to be consistent, and ultimately this issue will
probably be
formally submitted (again) to the ISO JAC. Note that it was
considered at
our recent meeting and rejected.
Please comment on what you consider the best course of action in
view
of these requests. I will note that we have not had similar requests
for a
change to the code for Serbian. Also, I would expect that if we did
change the code we may not be able to change the many records that
use it,
and would likely have a split file (although that decision would need
to
be made).
Rebecca
|