Print

Print


But since "mis" is in the code list, how can the languages be "uncoded"?  This symbol is simply used for languages that don't fit into any of the other available collective groups.

Milicent Wewerka

>>> Debbie Garside <[log in to unmask]> 05/04/07 10:26 AM >>>
"Uncoded languages" would be my preference.

Best regards

Debbie 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Constable
> Sent: 04 May 2007 15:03
> To: [log in to unmask] 
> Subject: Re: decisions required: "other" collections, mis
> 
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rebecca S. Guenther
> 
> > I would agree with the intent...
> 
> Good. Thanks for confirming that.
> 
> 
> > Also, in the sentence below...
> > it would be clearer to say:
> > "If a new language is added to ISO 639-2 which was 
> previously listed 
> > as a language under "mis"...
> 
> A problem with that is that ISO 639 has never listed 
> languages under mis.
> 
> 
> > I would prefer calling it something like "Other languages"
> > or "Other unrelated languages". Saying "Unsupported languages"
> > doesn't make sense to me-- it's not clear what isn't supported.
> > If they're really "unsupported" there wouldn't be an identifier for 
> > them. It's really more "Unenumerated languages"-- or miscellaneous 
> > languages that don't belong in any defined group.
> 
> Joan indicated "unsupported" was better to her than 
> "miscellaneous". I see what you say about "unsupported", though.
> 
> Some possibilities:
> 
> - Unsupported languages
> - Other languages
> - Other unrelated languages
> - Unenumerated languages
> - Uncoded languages
> - Other uncoded languages
> 
> Or maybe others have other ideas.
> 
> Perhaps it might be useful if each of us indicated a couple 
> of choices in order of preference. My picks:
> 
> 1) Other languages
> 2) Uncoded languages
> 
> 
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
>