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 Logically, the note "[jw published in error; withdrawn]" doesn't belong in the English name column.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"jw" published in error; withdrawn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Javanese [jw published in error; withdrawn]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