A couple comments: I agree that pressuring the JAC to adopt a less offensive code is futile. There are national libraries and government-funded software systems that use these codes that cannot be updated in any kind of timely way. Lots of countries would like representations that more closely resemble the native language names. I can’t remember the issue, but I have been up against something like this before and gave up, as interop and compatibility with legacy systems was paramount. 639-2 codes are not likely to change for that reason.
I also think allowing a particular organization to take ownership of a wiki might result in more politicized wikis. Seems like a good idea, but might come back to haunt us. Did a particular request prompt this? I do not know enough of the inner circle to know who should be the liaison to the board. I’ll leave that to the rest of you. Which spreadsheet — the table of group members or something else? Regards, Karen Broome > On May 17, 2017, at 12:22 PM, Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > <GRRRRR> > > On 17 May 2017 at 21:05, Milos Rancic <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 8:42 PM, Michael Everson <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > On 17 May 2017, at 17:13, Milos Rancic <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > >> Because SIL is at least sensible enough to have the policy to change > >> derogatory codes, while Congress Library is too white to be able to > >> comprehend that. > > > > You do not have any idea what you are talking about. > > Obviously. However, at least they understand that there are offensive > language names [1]. Although, thanks for the information, they are > also too white, as well, to recognize that there is a need to change > the code if it's been based on offensive name. > > > Melanin helps to protect us from UV radiation and to permit the production > > of Vitamin D. > > > > I have explained to you MANY TIMES. Most of the ISO 639-2 codes were made > > many years ago. No one was trying to insult anyone. No one was trying to > > push an imperialist agenda. No one was looking at skin tone variation in > > Chile. They were trying to tag data for libraries. Do you understand this? > > > > I have explained to you MANY TIMES as well that reluctance to change codes > > on the part of the JAC has to do with a concern for stability in encoding. > > > > I ave informed you that I have spoken to the JAC, and I have supplied to > > you their response. They looked at this 5 years ago and were not minded at > > that time to destabilize encoding. They also said they would consider an > > application if one were submitted. > > > > You persist in arguing with ME about it and all I have done is explain > > facts to you. > > You are still embarrassing yourself. Nobody told here that there are > bad intentions. (Just to remind you, Cold War ended ~30 years ago :P ) > I told you that you are perpetuating institutional racism [, filled > with absolutely good intentions]. > > If you want to understand what I am talking about, please start with > this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism> > > [1] http://archive.ethnologue.com/16/ethno_docs/introduction.asp > <http://archive.ethnologue.com/16/ethno_docs/introduction.asp> > > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom > <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom> > > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
_______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
