Thanks to Glenn for reminding me of this deadline.

From: ISO JAC Voting Member List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Håvard Hjulstad
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 10:18 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [JACVOTE] ISO 639 JAC ballot 2005-02 - Aranese

ISO 639 JAC ballot 2005-02 - Aranese

Voting deadline: 2005-09-09

Please see original submission below. Discussion was opened on 2005-02-14. There was some discussion, in particular relating to the name: Gascon vs Aranese.

Submitted by:

(A) Inclusion:
(1)
___ I am in favour of including Aranese in 639-2 (alpha-3)
_X_ I am opposed to inclusing Aranese in 639-2
[Inclusion in 639-1 is not balloted]
Comment:

At a minimum, there appears to be no reason for entries distinguishing Aranese and Gascon. Looking at the references, it does not appear the requester intends such a distinction – some of the references clearly identify the language in question as “Gascon”. The intent, then, appears to be requesting an ID for Gascon / Aranese.

The draft table for ISO/DIS 639-3 has had an entry for Gascon, though there was discussion of removing that (I need to review where we were at on the matter of Occitan and Gascon, etc. in 639-3). Certainly an individual language should not be added to part 2 if its not in part 3 – so I need to see the question on inclusion in part 3 settled before I can vote in favour of inclusion in part 2. If Gascon is included in part 3, I would certainly think it a potential candidate for inclusion in part 2 provided relevant criteria were met. Looking at the references, I see some evidence that Gascon / Aranese should be considered an individual language (evidence for inclusion in 639-3), but not clear evidence that criteria for inclusion in part 2 are met – there certainly appear to be some publications in or about Gascon / Aranese, but no indication of institutions housing 50 or more documents.

Given a still-open question about inclusion of Gascon / Aranese in 639-3 and a lack of clear evidence that criteria for inclusion in part 2 are met, I cannot vote in favour of including Gascon / Aranese in part 2 at this time.

(B) Identifier:
(2)
_X_ I am in favour of the alpha-3 identifier "gsc"
___ I am opposed to the alpha-3 identifier "gsc"
Comment: If accepted, this identifier would be appropriate.

(C) Names:
(3)
___ I am in favour of the English name "Aranese"
_X_ I am opposed to the English name "Aranese"
Comment: If accepted, the English-name entry should at least include “Gascon”.

(4)
___ I am in favour of the French name "aranes"
_X_ I am opposed to the French name "aranes"
Comment: If accepted, the French-name entry shold at least include the French equivalent to “Gascon”.

(5)
___ I am in favour of the indigenous name "aranés"
_X_ I am opposed to the indigenous name "aranés"
Comment: It appears likely that, if accepted, the indigenous-name entry should at least include other forms. If accepted, investigation into what other indigenous names besides “aranés” should be done.

(D) Comments:

******************************************

This data was submitted on: Monday, January 24, 2005 at 19:33:03

lang_in_eng = Aranes (occitan from Aran valley)

lang_in_fre = aranes (occitan du val d'Aran)

ref_where_found_1 = http://www.domsmith.co.uk/aranes/aranes.pdf

lang_in_vern = Aranes

ref_where_found_2 = http://www.domsmith.co.uk/aranes/aranes.pdf

trans_lit =

evidence = ortographical rules:

conselh d'aran (15) http://www6.gencat.net/llengcat/aran/docs/normes.pdf

CCOO (77) http://www6.gencat.net/llengcat/aran/docs/lexic-rl.pdf=20