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