From: Peter Constable (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Feb 01 2009 - 15:00:17 CST
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
> Codes that are withdrawn from a standard in the ISO 639 family are not
> still present in the standard. See the official text file provided by
> ISO 639-2/RA at:
They may not be listed there, but they are still defined with a stable encoding -- my point being, those IDs won't get re-defined.
>> The HTML page above correctly gives the current recommanded codes (the
>> other codes with the asterisk are non recommended coded, that are
>> still implicitly aliases that may be supported as they have still not
>> be reassigned to other languages;
> They aren't still supported by the ISO 639 authorities.
I'm not sure what "still supported by the ISO 639 authorities" means. They are still defined with stable semantics but are deprecated.
> Telling people that they should "write
> the [oldest] one... for legacy applications that cannot manage correctly
> the new standard code or for classes of applications for which you are
> not certain that they can use the new standard," without citing specific
> legacy applications that have this constraint, is like telling people
> that they should continue to use the old Unicode 1.1 Hangul syllables in
> the U+3400 to U+4DFF range instead of the newfangled Unicode 2.0 Hangul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 01 2009 - 15:02:22 CST