LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ISOJAC Archives


ISOJAC Archives

ISOJAC Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ISOJAC Home

ISOJAC Home

ISOJAC  July 2004

ISOJAC July 2004

Subject:

Re: Unresolved JAC issue - Spanish -- DISCUSSION until 9 July 2004

From:

Håvard Hjulstad <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Thu, 1 Jul 2004 17:14:39 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (159 lines)

The ballot actually only related to the T table. In the B table the
identifier for Spanish has always been and will remain "spa". You are right
in your argument; and if the identifier "esp" had been available in 1998,
that would most likely have been chosen for the T table (making one more
(unwanted) difference between the T and the B table).

Both tables share the main rule that identifiers should rather be based on
indigenous names than on English names. However, that rule is not
retroactive.

Best regards,
Håvard

-------------------------
Håvard Hjulstad    mailto:[log in to unmask]
  http://www.hjulstad.com/havard/
-------------------------
all outgoing mail is scanned using Norton AntiVirus

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gerhard Budin
> Sent: 1. juli 2004 16:09
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Unresolved JAC issue - Spanish -- DISCUSSION 
> until 9 July 2004
> 
> 
> would it be possible to split the vote for the T and the B 
> list? my vote for esp is ONLY meant for the T list and NOT 
> for the B list, in accordance with the difference in policies 
> for the two lists concerning English name base for 
> identifiers vs. vernacular name base!
> 
> regards
> Gerhard
> 
> 
> 
> H=E5vard Hjulstad <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> > That is absolutely correct (of course). Sorry for the typo! I shall 
> > correct it before the second ballot is circulated.
> >
> > Håvard
> >
> > -------------------------
> > Håvard Hjulstad    mailto:[log in to unmask]
> >   http://www.hjulstad.com/havard/
> > -------------------------
> > all outgoing mail is scanned using Norton AntiVirus
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On 
> > > Behalf Of Milicent K Wewerka
> > > Sent: 1. juli 2004 13:47
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: Re: Unresolved JAC issue - Spanish -- DISCUSSION until 9 
> > > July 2004
> > >
> > >
> > > Regarding the final statement on the ballot--I thought that the 
> > > ISO-639 alpha-3 "B" identifier would be "spa" regardless of the 
> > > outcome of the "T" identifier.
> > >
> > > Milicent Wewerka,
> > > Library of Congress
> > >
> > > >>> Håvard Hjulstad <[log in to unmask]> 7/1/2004 3:48:45 AM >>>
> > > Dear JAC members,
> > >
> > > The ballot below the # # # line has been voted on by JAC voting 
> > > members. The vote was not unanimous. Seven members voted for the 
> > > first alternative ("spa"); one member voted for the second 
> > > alternative ("esp"). According to JAC procedures the issue is not 
> > > resolved, and a second ballot will be called.
> > >
> > > However, we should allow a brief exchange of opinions 
> before we do 
> > > so. The issue was discussed at the JAC meeting in 
> January, but many 
> > > members of the wider JAC group weren't present there.
> > >
> > > We do want to avoid introducing changes in the code 
> table. However, 
> > > I find it a valid argument to claim that this is not 
> actually a "new 
> > > change", since users of ISO 639-2 were notified through 
> the footnote 
> > > that it will or might happen.
> > >
> > > Arguments please. I will circulate the second ballot to 
> JAC voting 
> > > members on Saturday 10 July. That will be a simple majority vote.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Håvard Hjulstad
> > > (ISO 639 JAC secretary)
> > >
> > > # # # # # # # #
> > >
> > > JAC ballot 2004-01 - Alpha-3 identifier for Spanish
> > >
> > > Submitted by (your name, please):
> > >
> > > Please see below for additional information.
> > >
> > > Please vote for one alternative:
> > >
> > > __ I am in favour of retaining "spa" as alpha-3 T identifier for 
> > > "Spanish; Castilian / espagnol; castillan".
> > >
> > > __ I am in favour of changing the alpha-3 T identifier to "esp".
> > >
> > > Comments:
> > >
> > > * * * * * * * * *
> > > In ISO 639-2:1998 the following footnote is found on 
> pages 18, 24, 
> > > 46, and
> > > 60:
> > >
> > > "After a period of five years from the publication of 
> this standard, 
> > > esp may be used as the ISO 639-2/T (terminology
> > > code) for Spanish." "Après une période de cinq ans suivant la 
> > > publication de cette norme, esp pourra être utilisé pour 
> l'espagnol 
> > > autant que l'ISO 639-2/T (codet terminologique)."
> > >
> > > The text of the footnote has been interpreted in two 
> different ways:
> > > (1) After five years you may (you are allowed to) use "esp";
> > > (2) After five years it may be decided whether the T identifier 
> > > should be changed from "spa" to "esp".
> > >
> > > The intended interpretation is (2). Unfortunately, based on 
> > > interpretation
> > > (1) "esp" has been used in some documents.
> > >
> > > At the JAC meeting in Washington DC 2004-01-15/16 the 
> following was 
> > > decided: "Because the published ISO 639-2 standard allows for the 
> > > possible use of the code ESP for Spanish after it has 
> been removed 
> > > from the list for five years, a proposal to define this code for 
> > > terminology use (ISO 639-2/T) will be circulated to the ISO 639 
> > > JAC."
> > >
> > > Following the present ballot the footnote will be removed 
> from ISO 
> > > 639-2, and "spa" or "esp" will be the only alpha-3 T 
> identifier (the 
> > > alpha-3 B identifier will remain "esp" regardless of the 
> outcome of 
> > > this ballot).
> > >
> 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2021
January 2021
November 2020
June 2020
May 2019
February 2019
September 2018
April 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
May 2016
April 2016
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
May 2013
April 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager