The only suggestion that I have for the note on Javanese is that it include the correct language code also. Saying that "jw" was an error doesn't tell you what it was intended to be.

Milicent Wewerka, Library of Congress

>>> [log in to unmask] 1/18/2005 4:04:25 PM >>>
I think it would be okay to add a note column. Another idea is to add
notes at the bottom of the page and point to them (like a reference) from
the entry.

Rebecca

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, [utf-8] HÃ¥vard Hjulstad wrote:

> I agree that the best option is to add a "note" column. But a column for just very few cases is also problematic. And we don't want to start "playing" too much with a note column.
>
> I think that Peter's argument is a very good basis for a decision. What do people think about this?
>
> Best regards,
> HÃ¥vard
>
> -------------------------
> HÃ¥vard 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 Peter Constable
> Sent: 18. januar 2005 16:45
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: lang code question: jw
>
>
>
> I agree that it doesnâ€*t logically belong in the English-name column. I was simply following the example of other cases, such as
>
>
>
>
> -ji
>
> yid
>
> Yiddish [withdrawn]
>
> yiddish
>
> 1989
>
> Dep
>
>
>
> The problem is that this is a note, but thereâ€*s no note column. Your suggestion moves the note into the Category of Change column, which is problematic in that it should only contain values Add, Dep, CC, NC or NA. A better solution might be the following:
>
>
>
>
> 639-1
>
> 639-2
>
> English Name of Language
>
> French Name of Language
>
> Date added
> or changed
>
> Category of Change
>
> Note
>
>
> -ji
>
> yid
>
> Yiddish
>
> yiddish
>
> 1989
>
> Dep
>
> withdrawn
>
>
> -jw
>
> jav
>
> Javanese
>
> javanais
>
> 1989
>
> Dep
>
> â€*jw†published in error; withdrawn
>
>
>
>
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
>
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of HÃ¥vard Hjulstad
> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 1:20 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: lang code question: jw
>
>
>
> I agree that something like this should be done. Logically, the note "[jw published in error; withdrawn]" doesn't belong in the English name column. May be:
>
>
>
>
> -jw
>
> jav
>
> Javanese
>
> javanais
>
> 1989
>
> "jw" published in error; withdrawn
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> HÃ¥vard
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> HÃ¥vard Hjulstad
>
> Standard Norge / Standards Norway
>
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Constable [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 14. januar 2005 23:12
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: FW: lang code question: jw
>
> There is some confusion out in the world regarding the alpha-2 symbol "jw" in relation to Javanese. See the message below as an example.
>
>
>
> The history is that, in ISO 639:1988, there was an error in Table 1 (Alphabetical list of two-letter language symbols): it showed "jw" for Javanese rather than "jv". Tables 2 and 3 as well as the Annex correctly showed "jv". The error was documented in ISO 639-1:2002.
>
>
>
> Nothing is mentioned at http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/codechanges.html about "jw" since it was never considered assigned, hence never changed. But one can't easily find *any* documentation regarding "jw" on the ISO 639 sites (as far as I know, there isn't any). Thus, there isn't any way for people to get clarification about "jw".
>
>
>
> I'd like to suggest that we add the following entry at the end of the list of additions/changes to ISO 639 so that "jw" is documented:
>
>
>
>
> -jw
>
> jav
>
> Javanese [jw published in error; withdrawn]
>
> javanais
>
> 1989
>
> Dep
>
>
>
>
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Davis [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 1:47 PM
> To: Peter Constable
> Cc: Doug Ewell; John Cowan; Addison Phillips
> Subject: lang code question: jw
>
>
>
> We have code in ICU that maps obsolete codes, and it maps jw to jv. I was
>
> checking lstreg, http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langcodes.html#ij,
>
> and http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/codechanges.html and I couldn't
>
> find jw. But I see it in google
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22iso+639%22+jw, such as in SIL:
>
>
>
> http://www.ethnologue.com/show_iso639.asp?code=jw
>
>
>
> If it was indeed a language code, it sounds like it is mistakenly missing
>
> from http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/codechanges.html and thus from
>
> lstreg.
>
>
>
> â€*Mark
>
>
>
>