Great, thanks Tom
Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Baker [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, 11 October 2007 4:17 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Language codes
On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 11:40:11AM +1000, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> I have had a formal request from AGLS for DCMI to consider approving
> ISO
> 639-3 for 3 letter language codes. How do I get this on the UB Agenda
> for consideration?
Noted - this note is enough to put it on the agenda. Let's discuss on
the next telecon. We have created a new term for RFC 4646 (which
obsoletes RFC 3066) [1], and the rationale for creating an identifier
for RFC 4646, as I recall it, was because we already had an identifier
for RFC 3066.
We already have a term for ISO 639-2 [2], so we could argue that we are
simply doing the same here as above.
It would be good to clarify the policy (or pragmatic stance) of the
Usage Board with regard to such additions.
Tom
[1] http://dublincore.org/usage/public-comment/2007/07/dcterms-changes/
[2] http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#ISO639-2
--
Dr. Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]>
Director, Specifications and Documentation Dublin Core Metadata
Initiative
--
Scanned by iSheriff - http://www.isheriff.com/ Is this email spam?
Forward to [log in to unmask]
|