 |
 |
Hi Håvard There was much discussion during the MA meeting with regard to this; I did not attend this meeting. However, during the meeting of the WG when I raised this again many members agreed with the view I expressed that the data had become so contentious that perhaps it should be taken out in future editions. My committee at BSI had produced an A4 statement re-iterating the concerns as expressed by the JAC and also including the fact that English is not an official language in England; as well as one or two other facts and figures not least that the UN had been looking at this for years and felt it was a political mine field. When I asked for a timescale for the next update I was told 5 years. I felt this was unacceptable as it would mean (by the time it had gone through the ISO process) that the data would not be deleted for at least another 8 years. I asked if it would make more sense to go to FDIS-2 but there was some opposition as technically the document had passed the vote and was due for publication as IS according to ISO rules. I suggested a NWIP and this was accepted. Members from DIN wished to be involved as there are minor changes that they would like to see made to the standard; we have already had some dialog in this regard. The timescale was thus reduced from 8 years to 3 years for the deletion of the data. The result was the resolution posted earlier. I also pointed out, during the meeting, that the data should have been deleted at DIS stage as 6 out of the 9 countries that commented on the DIS had asked for it to be removed. I had received this information from Michael Everson (who in turn had received it from Rebecca) and I think this was the turning point for some members. Letters from the JAC and Members voting against the FDIS were more than extremely useful. I think it was a united effort. If anyone would like to be involved in this NWIP I would be pleased to hear from you. Best regards Debbie -----Original Message----- From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Håvard Hjulstad Sent: 21 September 2006 13:34 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Deletion of Official Language Information in ISO 3166-1 Hi, It would be interesting to know what made the committee change its mind. Earlier feed-back to our input and other input to the same effect seemed to be quite insistant on keeping the information. If it is your power of persuasion that did the trick, Debbie: excellent and thanks! Best regards, Håvard -------------------- Håvard Hjulstad mailto:[log in to unmask] -------------------- -----Original Message----- From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Debbie Garside Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 11:58 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Deletion of Official Language Information in ISO 3166-1 Hi The following is an extract from the minutes of the recent meeting of TC46/WG2 in Geneva: ---- The WG resolved that: Debbie Garside (BSI) and Werner Stephan (DIN) should prepare a New Work Item Proposal to make "minor revisions and amendments" to ISO 3166-1 that would include the deletion of the "official languages" data. ---- Best regards Debbie Debbie Garside Managing Director GeoLang Limited Corner House Barn Street Haverfordwest Pembrokeshire SA61 1BW Wales UK Tel: 0044 (0)1437 766441 Web: www.geolang.com