Dear Gérard,

At 08:36 +0200 2006-04-21, Lang Gerard wrote:
>But my point is that, concerning this question, 
>the first (and perhaps only) thing they have to 
>do is to follow what is written in the ISO 639 
>standard they voted and accepted, as it is 
>mandatory in the ISO world.

The committee has the right to set working 
procedures I am sure. I think that it would be 
poor standardization for us to be "forced" to add 
2-letter codes for Tok Pisin etc since it would 
be BAD for those languages which can already be 
represented with 3-letter codes to suddenly be 
saddled with the ambiguity which would obtain 
with two codes. That is why there is this 
stability policy.

>N.B.:This exchange gives me the occasion of a question concerning ISO 15924
>"Code pour la representation des noms d'ecritures".
>Do you consider that the four-letter  scripts codes given by ISO 15924 to
>represent "scripts", defined as "set of graphic characters used for the
>written form of one or more languages", are representing ordered set of
>graphic characters or do not consider any privilegied order concerning the
>graphic characters included in the considered set ?

I do not understand your question. Latn is the 
Latin script, Nkoo is the N'Ko script, Cyrl is 
the Cyrillic script... It has nothing to do with 
ordering, but with script identity.
-- 
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com