 |
 |
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 > >