From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rebecca S. Guenther

> I would agree with the intent...

Good. Thanks for confirming that.


> Also, in the sentence below...
> it would be clearer to say:
> "If a new language is added to ISO 639-2 which was previously
> listed as a language under "mis"...

A problem with that is that ISO 639 has never listed languages under mis.


> I would prefer calling it something like "Other languages"
> or "Other unrelated languages". Saying "Unsupported languages"
> doesn't make sense to me-- it's not clear what isn't supported.
> If they're really "unsupported" there wouldn't be an identifier
> for them. It's really more "Unenumerated languages"-- or
> miscellaneous languages that don't belong in any defined group.

Joan indicated "unsupported" was better to her than "miscellaneous". I see what you say about "unsupported", though.

Some possibilities:

- Unsupported languages
- Other languages
- Other unrelated languages
- Unenumerated languages
- Uncoded languages
- Other uncoded languages

Or maybe others have other ideas.

Perhaps it might be useful if each of us indicated a couple of choices in order of preference. My picks:

1) Other languages
2) Uncoded languages



Peter