1. Serbo-Croatian I still don't feel like I understand the rationale for
wanting to include this in 639-2 other than the fact that it's in 639-1.
But I'm still not clear how it got in there, since we voted at our ISO JAC
meeting in 2000 to deprecate "sh". That is what is reflected on the change
list. Noone seems to have clarified whether the inclusion in 639-1 was
intentional or an error. Until I understand that better it is hard to make
a decision.  Isn't the language name objectionable to Serbs and Croats?
And if it is a macrolanguage that also includes Bosnian isn't there a
better name for it? That is, if indeed we want to include it, since I am
reluctant to reinstate something that had broad consensus to deprecate.

2. No linguistic content. This would be a good thing, and I have discussed
with our MARC colleagues and they agree. Particularly in XML blanks are
not a good thing and "und" and "mul" have other meanings. We would need a
proposal and a vote. Last suggestion was to use "zxx", which is fine with


On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Peter Constable wrote:

> There are a couple of items I've mentioned recently that were discussed
> for a while but which need some action:
> - Serbo-Croatian: I suggested that we add "hbs" to 639-2 (it's in the
> draft table for 639-3), but at the least we need to take action to
> clarify the status of "sh" in 639-1.
> - "no linguistic content": I suggested that we add this; I'd like to see
> us move toward a vote on it.
> Thanks.
> Peter Constable