As for the 50 document rule, we have to consider each submission on a case
by case basis to get an understanding of what constitutes the 50
documents. In this case, I think Michael makes a convincing case for
giving it a code. We may have to be somewhat subjective in the application
of the 50 document rule in some cases, e.g. if there were 50 documents all
written by one person in the language at one location, we might consider
other criteria before approving. Millie's suggestion about asking for
documentation outside the organization of the requestor might also be
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Michael Everson wrote:
> At 09:29 +0200 2003-10-19, Håvard Hjulstad wrote:
> >We have received a request to add an ISO 639 alpha-3 identifier for Klingon.
> >Please see http://www.kli.org/ for inside information. We are talking about
> >an "invented language" (although I suppose we will classify it as an
> >"artificial language").
> Håvard, of course there is no difference.
> >A sufficient number of documents seem to exist. But I still think that we
> >have a case where we need to discuss other criteria.
> Why? There are grammars and dictionaries of this
> language published. There are audio tapes
> published for learners. There is at least one
> journal which publishes about and in the
> language, and a number of monographs. In
> addition, there is a not-insignificant web
> >If 50 people get together and invent a language,
> >and each write one document in the language; do
> >we register it?
> Marc Okrand invented the language.
> >This language has not "native speakers"
> Neither does Sanskrit. Cornish doesn't either,
> though there are some who learn it very young
> >(50 native speakers and 50 documents, and I
> >wouldn't hesitate at all). It has also not been
> >developed as an artificial language for the
> >purpose of international communication.
> That is not a specified criterion for assigning a
> code to an artificial language.
> >The language was developed for a film.
> >It may be a "good" invented language. Is that a criterion?
> Of course the Klingon language should be given a
> code. It is more worthy of one than Volapük.
> Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com