 |
 |
Re 1: The existing standards do define the chair as rotating between Infoterm and LOC, which happen to be the RAs for parts 1 and 2, rather than having the chair defined on the basis of rotating between designees of TC37 and TC46. On that basis, I could see why the question comes up, and I agree it would require an amendment somewhere (this is not addressed in any way in the text of 639-3). But I don't think it came up while 639-3 was being drafted because it didn't seem like having the 639-3 get an equal share of chair duties was too important while representation on the JAC was. So, I think we could discuss long term how we think that role should be handled, but I don't think it is at all an urgent issue. Re 2: Yes, this does change the voting make-up: the 639-3 RA would be a voting member just as the 639-1 and 639-2 RAs -- that was precisely the point of WG1's decision. But as your comment suggests, there does need to be clarification as to what the role of the JAC will be wrt changes/additions to 639-3. It will be important to discuss this. The text for 639-3 Annex A is set (the FDIS ballot remains, but the wording cannot be changed at this point). Now we have to *interpret* what it says and come up with a common understanding of how the JAC will be operating in relation to that part of the 639 series. Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > Of Rebecca S. Guenther > Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 1:15 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Make-up of JAC > > In general I am not opposed to just including on the ISO639JAC a member of > the registration authority for 639-3. I am not too concerned about the > text of 639-2, since it is not the only thing that will be out of date and > we do need to have it revised (and should have a year ago). But I'm > wondering about the following issues: > > 1. The JAC is set up to have the chair rotate between the 2 registration > authorities-- will this need to be changed? I'm not sure that we could do > that without a reballot of the standard. (On the other hand, the chair > doesn't do that much these days, now that we have a secretary.) > > 2. It does change the balance of the committee in terms of voting. That > may not be a problem practically speaking. Would the 639-3 representative > be a voting member? But I think voting only applies to 639-1 and 639-2, > not 639-3 (that is, the process of change/add to 639-3 does not involve a > committee that votes)? > > I would suggest that we take this up on our next JAC teleconference. > > Rebecca > > On Wed, 3 May 2006, Peter Constable wrote: > > > I'm preparing the FDIS text for 639-3 and need to act on the > > disposition of ballot comments accepted by WG1 at the Warsaw meeting > > last year. One of the comments had come from the ISO 639-2 RA (LOC): > > > > > > > > The issue of JAC membership needs to be clarified. Currently section > > A.3 contains the statement "ISO 639/RA/JAC shall include one > > representative of the ISO 639-3/RA." It is not clear if this means > > that one of the existing three representatives from TC37 will serve > > that funtion or if this is a fourth representative from TC37. At the > > ISO 639-RA/JAC meeting in January 2004, it was agreed that the makeup > > of the JAC should maintain a balance of representation from TC 37 and > > TC 46 - 3 members each - and thus that a representative of SIL (the > > designated RA for 639-3) should fill one of the three TC 37 positions. > > > > > > > > This WG decision for this comment was not accepted, with the following > > note: > > > > > > > > The consensus of the working group is that the make-up of the JAC > > should include three representative each from TC 37 and from TC 46, > > and in addition should include one representative each from the > > registration authorities for part 1, part 2 and part 3; that is, a > > total membership of 9. The representatives from registration > > authorities are not perceived to be representing either TC 37 or TC > > 46. > > > > > > > > As project editor, I basically have no choice but to make sure the > > FDIS for 639-3 reflects that decision. Of course, this is something > > that the JAC will probably want to process, which is why I mention it > > here. > > > > > > > > One small issue is that we will end up with essentially two different > > statements regarding the make-up of the ISO 639-RA/JAC: one statement > > found in part 1 and in part 2, and another in part 3: > > > > > > > > Here's the statement from ISO 639-1:2002, which is identical to that > > in ISO 639-2:1998: > > > > > > > > A.3.1 Composition > > > > ISO 639/RA-JAC is composed of > > > > * one representative of the International Information Centre for > Terminology (Infoterm; representing ISO 639-1/RA), > > > > * one representative of the Library of Congress (LC; representing > ISO 639-2/RA), > > > > * three representatives of ISO/TC 37 (nominated by ISO/TC 37), > and > > > > * three representatives of ISO/TC 46 (nominated by ISO/TC 46). > > > > Both ISO/TCs may nominate substitute representatives. > > > > > > > > Here's the statement from ISO/DIS 639-3 (which will not change in this > > regard in the FDIS - statements having to do with responsibilities but > > not composition omitted): > > > > > > > > A.3 Composition and responsibilities of the Joint Advisory Committee > > ISO 639/RA-JAC > > > > The composition and responsibilities of ISO 639/RA-JAC are defined in > ISO 639-1, A.3 and ISO 639-2, A.3. This part of ISO 639 adds the following > to the definition: > > > > * ISO 639/RA-JAC shall include one representative of the ISO 639-3/RA. > > > > * .... > > > > > > > > Thus, the statement in 639-3 is written as though it were effectively > > amending the statement in parts 1 and 2. Since nobody besides the JAC > > is affected by statements of its composition, it seems to me that the > > difference between the two statements is not a problem as long as we > > have an understanding among us regarding who the members are. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Constable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >