Alpha 2 IDs are legacy, and that code space cannot possibly scale to cover potential requests no matter how it is sliced. Moreover, adding new alpha-2 IDs will have a _destabilizing_ impact on users of ISO 639 since any language that might be considered for an alpha-2 ID already has an alpha-3 ID. Indeed, you probably remember in 2000 when the JAC was formed that, in relation to work on RFC 3066, IETF requested that alpha-2 IDs be frozen. The JAC decided some time ago that no more alpha-2 IDs would be defined.

Alpha-2 IDs in general are not off topic, but I think it's fair for Havard to say that proposals to add new alpha-2 IDs are out of scope given established JAC policy.


-----Original Message-----
From: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Everson
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 12:08 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: SV: Tetum, tet - French name

On 15 Apr 2011, at 08:57, Håvard Hjulstad wrote:

> Thank you for your input relating to the French names. (The issue of alpha-2 identifier is off topic, and will not be discussed.)

In what way is "the issue of [an ISO 639] alpha-2 identifier" to be considered "off topic" for the ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee discussion list?

Michael Everson *