Print

Print


Would it be possible to rename the element grc as pre-modern Greek?  That would encompass the forms of the language that are currently using that code element.  In a sense this would be broadening the denotation as Peter mentioned below.  Of course that might mean that ISO639-3 would need two additions--one for medieval (gkm) and another that is specifically restricted to the ancient time period.  How exact do we need to be in defining the time periods?

Milicent Wewerka, Library of Congress
 

>>> "Patton,Glenn" <[log in to unmask]> 08/01/07 10:58 AM >>>
I agree with Peter's concern about 'grc'.  For bibliographic records
(and I looked at a bunch this morning), I believe we'd be faced with a
situation in which it would often be difficult to determine (based on
the data in the records) what the correct coding should be.  For
example, I saw a number of microforms of manuscripts created in the 12th
century.  It seems to me that one could not automatically assume that
the correct coding would become "gkm" because the text of the manuscript
might reflect the characteristics of the earlier form of Greek.  A
cataloger might be able to make the determination at the point of
cataloging but one could only guess if a conversion of existing records
were undertaken.
 
--Glenn

________________________________

From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Peter Constable
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 11:20 PM
To: [log in to unmask] 
Subject: Re: [ISOJAC] First round of changes for ISO 639-3 review period
over REPLIES REQUESTED



Broadening the denotation of an ID is not a breaking change, in the
sense that existing records tagged with (e.g.) "eus" continue to be
correctly and as-optimally tagged after the merger. 

 

It is narrowing of a denotation that would be a breaking change; e.g.,
splitting Ancient Greek in a way that narrows the time-depth varieties
over which "grc" applies would mean that some unknown number of records
tagged with "grc" would suddenly become incorrectly tagged when the
change takes place.

 

 

Peter

 

From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Joan Spanne
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 12:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask] 
Subject: Re: First round of changes for ISO 639-3 review period over
REPLIES REQUESTED

 


Peter and Milicent responded to my memo of 9 July, but no one else has
commented. I think I answered their specific issues, but my answers also
pointed out where discussion is still needed. 

Action is awaiting on: 

2006-080 <http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/chg_detail.asp?id=2006-080> 

bej

Beja

	Add Bedawiyet 

2006-090 <http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/chg_detail.asp?id=2006-090> 

ile

Interlingue

	Add Occidental


(these are both 639-2 code elements, where these changes came about
through interaction with -3 code elements) 

and on these: 
2006-118 <http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/chg_detail.asp?id=2006-118>
bsz        Souletin Basque        Merge        Merge into [eus] Basque 
2006-119 <http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/chg_detail.asp?id=2006-119>
bqe        Navarro-Labourdin Basque        Merge        Merge into [eus]
Basque 
I did not ask for JAC input on this before, as both code elements being
retired are only in 639-3, but on further consideration, I decided to
bring it up, since [eus] is in 639-2, and this could be considered
broadening the denotation of [eus] Basque, based on the interpretations
taken for the three code elements when 639-3 was drafted. 

And the two tough ones: 

2006-084 <http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/chg_detail.asp?id=2006-084>  

gkm 

Medieval Greek 

add code element


this affects [grc] Classical Greek, in particular. See Peter and
Milicent's memos for discussion (split / macrolanguage / collection are
the readily apparent possible answers). 

2006-129 <http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/chg_detail.asp?id=2006-129>  

cat

Catalan 

Catalan 

Catalan (macrolanguage) 

2006-129 

cat

Catalan 

Individual language 

Macrolanguage 

2006-129 

cln

		Catalan (individual language) 

2006-129 

vac

		Valencian


I have not heard anything favorable toward Valencian as a separate code
element from the JAC, and I also think Valencian does not warrant a code
element on linguistic grounds, and the sociolinguistic landscape is too
uneven to grant one on sociolinguistic grounds. Is that the JAC
concensus? If so, how is the response to be made? (The decision to
consider Valencian at all was based on the recommendation they were
given last year when their request to 639-2 was denied.) 

For those of you away from the office but able to briefly reply, when
will you be returning to work to take up these questions? 

-Joan 




Milicent K Wewerka <[log in to unmask]> 
Sent by: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]> 

2007-07-23 12:32 PM 

Please respond to
ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>

To

[log in to unmask] 

cc

	
Subject

Re: First round of changes for ISO 639-3 review period over

 

		




I have two comments on the changes to ISO639-3 as proposed in your
document.

Request 2006-084 for a new code element for Medieval Greek (gkm):
Adopting this addition will make it necessary to revised the captions
for identifiers grc and ell/gre.  Those identifiers are part of ISO
639-2.

Request 2006-127 for a new code element for Katso (kaf):  This may be
the same language as Kaduo (ktp).


Milicent Wewerka, Library of Congress


>>> Joan Spanne <[log in to unmask]> 07/09/07 5:54 PM >>>
Hello All,

The first round of change requests for ISO 639-3 underwent review from 
April 1 - June 30. As expected, not many received any comments, though
the 
Valencian request received 43 comments alone (5 other change requests 
received one comment each), about 1/4 opposed and 4/5 in favor
(including 
a form letter sent in by 9 people).

I am attaching a document that is my report on the changes, with
summaries 
and recommendations. Three code elements affected are in both Part 2 and

Part 3. The changes to these are summarized first in the report. The
rest 
of the report contains summaries of all other changes (those affecting 
only Part 3).

Obviously action on the three code elements in both parts will require 
agreement of the JAC. In addition, though, I would appreciate a review
of 
the other proposed changes, as it is just possible that one or more of 
them might have some effect on Part 2 that I had not foreseen.

To see the actual change request documentation, use this pattern for the

link:

http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/chg_detail.asp?id=2006-129 
where the parameter at the end is the change request number.

In order to minimize delay in posting the results of the requests (at 
least for those only pertaining to part 3), I would appreciate a
response 
by July 18th, if possible. Debate on the Valencian - Catalan matter may 
take longer, of course. For more on that matter, please see my message 
dated 13 Apr 2007.

Thanks,

Joan Spanne
ISO 639-3/RA
SIL International
7500 W Camp Wisdom Rd
Dallas, TX 75236
[log in to unmask]