I agree that the best option is to add a "note" column. But a column for just very few cases is also problematic. And we don't want to start "playing" too much with a note column.
 
I think that Peter's argument is a very good basis for a decision. What do people think about this?
 
Best regards,
Håvard

-------------------------
Håvard Hjulstad    mailto:[log in to unmask]
  http://www.hjulstad.com/havard/
-------------------------
all outgoing mail is scanned using Norton AntiVirus

-----Original Message-----
From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Constable
Sent: 18. januar 2005 16:45
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: lang code question: jw

I agree that it doesn’t logically belong in the English-name column. I was simply following the example of other cases, such as

 

-ji

yid

Yiddish [withdrawn]

yiddish

1989

Dep

 

The problem is that this is a note, but there’s no note column. Your suggestion moves the note into the Category of Change column, which is problematic in that it should only contain values Add, Dep, CC, NC or NA. A better solution might be the following:

 

639-1

639-2

English Name of Language

French Name of Language

Date added
or changed

Category of Change

Note

-ji

yid

Yiddish

yiddish

1989

Dep

withdrawn

-jw

jav

Javanese

javanais

1989

Dep

“jw” published in error; withdrawn

 

 

Peter

 

 

 


From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Håvard Hjulstad
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 1:20 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: lang code question: jw

 

I agree that something like this should be done. Logically, the note "[jw published in error; withdrawn]" doesn't belong in the English name column. May be:

 

-jw

jav

Javanese               

javanais

1989                   

"jw" published in error; withdrawn

 

 

 

Håvard

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Håvard Hjulstad

Standard Norge / Standards Norway

mailto:[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Constable [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 14. januar 2005 23:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: FW: lang code question: jw

There is some confusion out in the world regarding the alpha-2 symbol "jw" in relation to Javanese. See the message below as an example.

 

The history is that, in ISO 639:1988, there was an error in Table 1 (Alphabetical list of two-letter language symbols): it showed "jw" for Javanese rather than "jv". Tables 2 and 3 as well as the Annex correctly showed "jv". The error was documented in ISO 639-1:2002.

 

Nothing is mentioned at http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/codechanges.html about "jw" since it was never considered assigned, hence never changed. But one can't easily find *any* documentation regarding "jw" on the ISO 639 sites (as far as I know, there isn't any). Thus, there isn't any way for people to get clarification about "jw".

 

I'd like to suggest that we add the following entry at the end of the list of additions/changes to ISO 639 so that "jw" is documented:

 

-jw

jav

Javanese [jw published in error; withdrawn]

javanais

1989

Dep

 

 

Peter

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Davis [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 1:47 PM
To: Peter Constable
Cc: Doug Ewell; John Cowan; Addison Phillips
Subject: lang code question: jw

 

We have code in ICU that maps obsolete codes, and it maps jw to jv. I was

checking lstreg, http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langcodes.html#ij,

and http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/codechanges.html and I couldn't

find jw. But I see it in google

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22iso+639%22+jw, such as in SIL:

 

http://www.ethnologue.com/show_iso639.asp?code=jw

 

If it was indeed a language code, it sounds like it is mistakenly missing

from http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/codechanges.html and thus from

lstreg.

 

Mark