Re: [Ltru] Re: extlang

What Peter Constable says below sounds true to me, from what I can  
recall of the little I could understand of that particular debate,  
which was not very much at all.

FWIW, for a relevant example of my TC 46 Terms and Definitions in  
International Standards teamwork, please see TC 46/SC 11's first  
standard, ISO 15489. For more of my work (again, in the field of  
compiling and harmonizing Terms and Definitions in International  
Standards), please consult also TC 37's ISO 704 and ISO 5127. I  
believe they all provide good models, should LTRU ever decide to go  
the T&D route. I could cite more examples, but trust this note is  
enough to assist list members who are busy e-mailing me privately, so  
that we may avoid more mail than is needed at present (short  
lunchtime of a busy working day in Ireland).

mg

On 4 Sep 2007, at 15:46, scríobh Peter Constable:

> From: Doug Ewell [mailto:dewell@roadrunner.com]
>
>
>> *IF* we implement extended language subtags... then we
>> are implementing them strictly on the basis of macrolanguage  
>> assignments
>> made by ISO 639-3/RA.  If their decision is that Min Nan "is a"  
>> Chinese,
>> then that is that; we don't second-guess them and toss out the  
>> ones we
>> don't agree with.
>>
>
> Just as a point of history, it was more or less this community that  
> decided this: the ISO 639/RA-JAC had no choice about whether Min  
> Nan "is a" Chinese (in the sense of whether "nan" must be treated  
> as encompassed by "zh(o)") because the IETF Languages List  
> established that association several years earlier.
- -
Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991)
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn, Baile an
Bhóthair, Co. Átha Cliath, Éire.
* mgunn@egt.ie * eamonn@egt.ie *

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru