Sorry, I started to write this message the other day and got distracted.
We are okay with these (also with the proposal for classical Syriac) We
are doing a new edition of the MARC language code list, which will reflect
these changes..
Rebecca
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Peter Constable wrote:
> I still haven’t heard any response from Rebecca or Joan on these. Now
> we also have a new set of actions wrt Aramaic – clearly Joan is on
> board, but I don’t know if others are. We need to bring these issues
> to closure, please.
>
> Peter
>
> ________________________________
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Constable
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 3:17 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: action on items
>
> In that case, do Rebecca and Joan have a clear understanding of action items?
>
> Malay: MARC needs to adjust encompassed languages to those encompassed by 639 macrolanguage mappings
>
> Occitan:
> - ISO 639-3: The IDs auv, gsc, lms, lnc and prv will remain defined with their current meanings, but these will be deprecated, they will be documented as having been merged into oci, and users will be advised to use that ID. Change the scope of oci from M to I.
>
> - Both 639-2 and 639-3: Change names for oci from “Occitan (post 1500); Provençal” to “Occitan (post 1500)”. Change names for pro from “Old Provençal (to 1500)” to “Old Occitan (to 1500)” (or, inverted: “Occitan, Old (to 1500)”).
>
>
> Syriac: no action req’d for 639; MARC needs to distinguish syr and syc
>
>
> And we have an open issue wrt Malay and Swahili: does 639-2 normalize its names to that of 639-3, i.e. “Malay (macrolanguage)” and “Swahili (macrolanguage)” (and the French equivalents)?
>
> We also need closure on Tibetan and Aramaic, but I’ll leave those for a separate msg.
>
>
> Peter
>
> ________________________________
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Håvard Hjulstad
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 12:32 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: action on items
>
> I think you are now hearing a unanimous "No objection to the recommendations"!
>
> Håvard
>
> --------------------
> Håvard Hjulstad
> Standard Norge / Standards Norway
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> --------------------
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Constable
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 7:14 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: action on items
> It’s been a week since I wrote asking for progress. Only Joan and Milicent have commented on the mail I sent. If you don’t have any comments and no objections, then a simple “No objection to the recommendations” would allow us to make progress.
>
>
> Thanks
> Peter
>
>
|