Print

Print


Havard will need to send out a ballot to the JAC voting members to
formally approve it.

Rebecca

On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Joan Spanne wrote:

> I will add it immediately. SIL's intention is that the the jointly held 
> elements of Parts 2 and 3 should always be as closely in sync as possible. 
> Since the tables we have on the 639-3 website actually do also include the 
> collective codes of Part 2, even a new collective code gets added to my 
> database for management tracking, though it is not included in the Part 3 
> download files. This would be similar for any change to Part 1, also.
> 
> The plan is to process annual batches of changes. This year there are two 
> batches because of the backlog of requests during the final draft phase of 
> the standard in 2006 (since we in SIL were under the impression that the 
> FDIS code set was to be stable, as it had been included in the voting 
> process). We certainly hope the rate of change will settle down after this 
> year. I have over 140 new change requests to be considered, and there are 
> more coming in daily.
> 
> -Joan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peter Constable <[log in to unmask]> 
> Sent by: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>
> 2007-08-01 08:02 PM
> Please respond to
> ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>
> 
> 
> To
> [log in to unmask]
> cc
> 
> Subject
> Re: ISO 639-2 proposal: Blissymbols; Blissymbolics; Bliss - Discussion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joan’s approach makes sense to me.
>  
> Joan, can you clarify: if something is approved for 639-2 and is an 
> appropriate addition for 639-3 (i.e. not a collection), will you update 
> the 639-3 records immediately, or add it into the next batch of changes to 
> be published as part of 639-3 semi-annually (or whatever the frequency 
> is)?
>  
> Thanks
> Peter
>  
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf 
> Of Joan Spanne
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 9:53 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: ISO 639-2 proposal: Blissymbols; Blissymbolics; Bliss - 
> Discussion
>  
> 
> I have no problem with the JAC just balloting--and approving--it for 
> 639-2, in which case it is automatically added to 639-3. I had said as 
> much during that teleconference, that if an identifier is going to be 
> considered for 639-2, it should just go through the existing 639-2 process 
> of JAC discussion and balloting, and if approved, it enters both parts. If 
> not approved, then it could be considered for 639-3, if warranted. 
> 
> The exceptions to this would be 
> 1) it is a collective code element, and does not get included in Part 3 
> 2) it causes a conflict with something in Part 3, in which case I alert 
> the JAC to that problem during the discussion phase, and specific issues 
> are addressed 
> 
> I see no problem with Blissymbols... 
> Vote: yes 
> 
> -Joan 
> 
> 
> "Rebecca S. Guenther" <[log in to unmask]> 
> Sent by: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]> 
> 2007-07-31 03:14 PM 
> 
> 
> Please respond to
> ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>
> 
> 
> 
> To
> [log in to unmask] 
> cc
> 
> Subject
> Re: ISO 639-2 proposal: Blissymbols; Blissymbolics; Bliss - Discussion
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since this was in the pipeline for ISO 639-2, shouldn't it have been
> considered in the same for 639-3? 
> 
> To clarify the process... If we get a request for 639-2, first we see if
> it's in 639-3 and propose it for 639-2 if it meets the criteria. If it is
> requested for 639-2 and it isn't in 639-3, it then gets requested for
> both, (assuming it meets the criteria)? It probably should have been
> requested for 639-3 during the last revision period since it was submitted
> in 2006, but I guess it looks like it fell between the cracks. 
> 
> Rebecca
> 
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Joan Spanne wrote:
> 
> > The process to submit a request for 639-3 starts with a form:
> > 
> > (change request type 5)
> > and continues with another form (since this is for a new language, not a 
> 
> > change to an existing code element)
> > 
> > 
> > The next round of requests will be up for formal consideration Sept - 
> Dec. 
> > and the outcomes will be announced in January 2008. So this will not 
> > enable you to make your announcement, Michael. My apologies.
> > 
> > -Joan
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Håvard  Hjulstad <[log in to unmask]> 
> > Sent by: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>
> > 2007-07-31 11:17 AM
> > Please respond to
> > ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>
> > 
> > 
> > To
> > [log in to unmask]
> > cc
> > 
> > Subject
> > Re: ISO 639-2 proposal: Blissymbols; Blissymbolics; Bliss - Discussion
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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,
> > Håvard
> > 
> > --------------------
> > Håvard 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
> > 
> 
>