Print

Print


I am not at home and close to my papers, but from what I can see from email exchanges you are indeed right that the item was discussed (with no negative submissions, as far as I can see), and that no ballot has been circulated.

However, we cannot process this item for ISO 639-2 without consideration for ISO 639-3. It should indeed be processed for ISO 639-3 now. Subsequently we should consider whether encoding in ISO 639-2 would also be needed.

What is the status in 639-3? I don't see that from where I am sitting right now.

Best regards,
H�vard

--------------------
H�vard Hjulstad
  Standard Norge / Standards Norway
  [log in to unmask]
--------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Everson
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 3:47 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ISO 639-2 proposal: Blissymbols; Blissymbolics; Bliss - Discussion

At 09:39 -0400 2007-07-31, Rebecca S. Guenther wrote:
>It looks like this never went out for a vote. Maybe Havard can tell us
>its status.

There was no objection raised in any previous discussion. There was some request for clarification which was provided.

It would be lovely if I could inform the Bliss group here in Dundee that "zbl" is approved for Blissymbols.
--
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com