Looking at our JAC teleconference on 2006-07-10 we made a decision that in
exceptional circumstances, we could introduce a new code into 639-3. I
have attached the notes from that teleconference (see the decision box
under Discussion). I am not sure where that decision went in terms of
procedures for ISO 639-3.
On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Debbie Garside wrote:
> I agree with Michael. This should be dealt with as soon as possible.
> +1 to zbl
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Everson
> > Sent: 01 August 2007 09:22
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: ISO 639-2 proposal: Blissymbols; Blissymbolics;
> > Bliss - Discussion
> > I proposed zbl for Blissymbols on 2006-06-14.
> > I sent a reminder about it 2006-10-20.
> > Håvard opened discussion until 2006-11-10.
> > Håvard should have issued his ballot on 2006-11-11.
> > On 2006-10-25 Peter said:
> > >I don't want to block new proposals that have already been
> > introduced,
> > >but as discussed in our teleconference yesterday, there are various
> > >issues that need to get resolved before 639-3 can be
> > published (ballot
> > >will be closing in the next few weeks; I'm preparing info on
> > the open
> > >issues and will send that out shortly). Between that and other open
> > >proposals Havard is working to bring to closure, I think it would be
> > >helpful if we could hold off on additional *new* proposals (unless
> > >there is an important and urgent user need) until we get the issues
> > >blocking 639-3 out of the way.
> > There **is** an important and urgent user need (as I said in
> > response to him on 2006-10-25).
> > Bliss is being built into software products alongside
> > languages like English, Swedish, Icelandic, French, Finnish,
> > etc etc etc. We want to tag web pages. We (I speak as a
> > member of the UK affiliate of Blissymbolics Communication
> > International) did not ask for the tag out of idle interest.
> > I was, frankly, surprised to find when I checked that it had
> > not been approved already.
> > I think we have been more than patient with the endless
> > discussions on Valencian over the last months. Certainly the
> > proposal for Blissymbols comes now as no surprise to the ISO
> > 639-3 Secretariat. I do not understand Joan's message.
> > I do not think I should have to file a new application for
> > Bliss since it is clear ISO 639-3
> > On 2006-10-28 Gerhard Budin said:
> > >I also agree, it should be included in both, parts -2 and -3
> > *****Come on, folks.***** Raise your hands and
> > *approve* "zbl" now without dragging your heels on
> > *procedure*. And if you have to issue a formal ballot do it
> > TODAY. I mean it. Otherwise I shall have no alternative at
> > the very least but file a protest with the ISO TC37 Secretariat.
> > Telling me that we have to wait until December
> > 2007 is ***NOT*** acceptable. We applied for a ISO 639-2
> > code, the language exists, there are many documents, the code
> > "zbl" is free. Take an executive decision please.
> > At 14:19 -0500 2007-07-31, Joan Spanne wrote:
> > >The process to submit a request for 639-3 starts with a form:
> > >
> > >(change request type 5)
> > >and continues with another form (since this is for a new
> > language, not
> > >a change to an existing code element)
> > >
> > >The next round of requests will be up for formal
> > consideration Sept -
> > >Dec. and the outcomes will be announced in January 2008. So
> > this will
> > >not enable you to make your announcement, Michael.
> > >My apologies.
> > >
> > >-Joan
> > --
> > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com