I also apologize for not responding. I agree with the others about
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Peter Constable wrote:
> Sorry; I was tied up all last week (and hence a bit before and after
> as well) with JTC1/S2/WG2 meetings. I think I've indicated support for
> your proposal regarding process; that, by implication, I considered to
> have indicated agreement with the proposed change for Lyngngam.
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Joan Spanne
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 7:57 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: approval of Lyngngam announced
> Hello All,
> The resolution of change request 2007-064 (http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/chg_detail.asp?id=2007-064) has been published. The new language code element Lyngngam [lyg] has been adopted; there has been no change made to the code element Khasi [kha]. The comment linked from this page gives details as to how the decision was made (much of it should be recognizable from my recent writings to the JAC, as I intended it to form something of a precedent).
> While I think previous discussions of the JAC established their agreement on the specific case of Lyngngam (thank you, Eeva and Christian, for the confirmations), I also think the process of arriving at decisions in future cases still requires actual discussion and agreement, since I ask whether a vote is needed, and we did not hear at all from Rebecca or Milicent.
> Best regards,
> Joan Spanne
> ISO 639-3/RA
> SIL International
> 7500 W Camp Wisdom Rd
> Dallas, TX 75236
> [log in to unmask]