Print

Print


 I agree with Michael.  This should be dealt with as soon as possible.

+1 to zbl

Best

Debbie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Everson
> Sent: 01 August 2007 09:22
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: ISO 639-2 proposal: Blissymbols; Blissymbolics; 
> Bliss - Discussion
> 
> I proposed zbl for Blissymbols on 2006-06-14.
> I sent a reminder about it 2006-10-20.
> Håvard opened discussion until 2006-11-10.
> 
> Håvard should have issued his ballot on 2006-11-11.
> 
> On 2006-10-25 Peter said:
> 
> >I don't want to block new proposals that have already been 
> introduced, 
> >but as discussed in our teleconference yesterday, there are various 
> >issues that need to get resolved before 639-3 can be 
> published (ballot 
> >will be closing in the next few weeks; I'm preparing info on 
> the open 
> >issues and will send that out shortly). Between that and other open 
> >proposals Havard is working to bring to closure, I think it would be 
> >helpful if we could hold off on additional *new* proposals (unless 
> >there is an important and urgent user need) until we get the issues 
> >blocking 639-3 out of the way.
> 
> There **is** an important and urgent user need (as I said in 
> response to him on 2006-10-25). 
> Bliss is being built into software products alongside 
> languages like English, Swedish, Icelandic, French, Finnish, 
> etc etc etc. We want to tag web pages. We (I speak as a 
> member of the UK affiliate of Blissymbolics Communication
> International) did not ask for the tag out of idle interest. 
> I was, frankly, surprised to find when I checked that it had 
> not been approved already.
> 
> I think we have been more than patient with the endless 
> discussions on Valencian over the last months. Certainly the 
> proposal for Blissymbols comes now as no surprise to the ISO 
> 639-3 Secretariat. I do not understand Joan's message. 
> I do not think I should have to file a new application for 
> Bliss since it is clear ISO 639-3
> 
> On 2006-10-28 Gerhard Budin said:
> >I also agree, it should be included in both, parts -2 and -3
> 
> *****Come on, folks.***** Raise your hands and
> *approve* "zbl" now without dragging your heels on 
> *procedure*. And if you have to issue a formal ballot do it 
> TODAY. I mean it. Otherwise I shall have no alternative at 
> the very least but file a protest with the ISO TC37 Secretariat.
> 
> Telling me that we have to wait until December
> 2007 is ***NOT*** acceptable. We applied for a ISO 639-2 
> code, the language exists, there are many documents, the code 
> "zbl" is free. Take an executive decision please.
> 
> At 14:19 -0500 2007-07-31, 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
> 
> --
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
> 
>