[Ltru] Re: Obsolete descriptions (was: "X" vs. 'X (macrolanguage)")

"Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> Sat, 08 December 2007 21:30 UTC

Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J17G3-00069c-4l; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 16:30:47 -0500
Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1J17G2-00069N-51 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 16:30:46 -0500
Received: from [] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J17G1-00069F-Qx for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 16:30:45 -0500
Received: from mta9.adelphia.net ([]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J17G1-0002l9-Du for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 16:30:45 -0500
Received: from DGBP7M81 ([]) by mta9.adelphia.net (InterMail vM. 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20071208213044.JAAG16492.mta9.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 8 Dec 2007 16:30:44 -0500
Message-ID: <007c01c839e1$978d8c00$6601a8c0@DGBP7M81>
From: Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2007 13:30:44 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++)
X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69
Subject: [Ltru] Re: Obsolete descriptions (was: "X" vs. 'X (macrolanguage)")
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote:

>>> The SIL pages claim that the description for "sw" is "Swahili 
>>> (macrolanguage)".  The 4646 registry claims that it's "Swahili", at 
>>> least one of them is wrong.
>> SIL's pages in relation to this entry in ISO 639-3 are not wrong wrt 
>> ISO 639.
> Then the 4646 registry must be wrong, it's supposed to reflect 
> whatever description ISO 639-1 offers for an alpha-2 code.  Caveat, I 
> looked up the ISO 639-1 "sw" on the SIL Web form, not some ISO 639-3 
> "sw".

The ISO 639-2 site says 'sw' is "Swahili".
The ISO 639-3 site says 'sw' is "Swahili (macrolanguage)".

Nobody's lying.  The two RA's don't agree on this level of detail. 
Probably nobody thought of it before; look how long it took us to get 
around to it.

Replying to me:

>> 639-1 and 639-2 do not have this type of parenthetical information
> Peter or John (or both) said that this will be coordinated for all 
> parts of ISO 639, and I made sure to select "639-1" on the Web form 
> where I got "Swahili (macrolanguage)" for "sw".

They're not coordinated.  I suspect that one day they will be, but 
they're not yet.

> Is there another source for this stuff ?  I trashed my old 639-2 
> bookmark in favour of 639-3.

I wouldn't do that, if you want to cross-check the 4645bis work.  Both 
sources are still relevant.  I did trash my 639-1 bookmark, but only 
because everything important points to the 639-2 site anyway.

Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ 

Ltru mailing list