On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Michael Everson everson@evertype.com wrote:
On 18 May 2017, at 12:56, Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Michael Everson everson@evertype.com wrote:
The correct terms to use are “endonym” and “exonym”. You maintain that at least some Mapuche dislike an exonym so much that they refuse to use a Wikipedia prefixed with “arn”. They live in Chile, right? In a region called Araucanía. They may call it something else in their language, but it would appear that this term would be widespread and visible everywhere.
Do we want to talk about Mapudungun issue and do the best to fix their problem or we want to continue the general discussion?
I have ALREADY TOLD YOU what can be done. I told you and the Chilean representative in Berlin. I told you just yesterday. I wrote to the JAC mentioning the pronblem. They responded. I forward their response here. There isn’t anything else LangCom can do about it.
If Chileans wish to petition the ISO 639 JAC again about this matter, the JAC will consider it.
I do not believe that LangCom or WMF should sponsor such a petition.
Miloš Rančić, I hereby request an immediate formal apology from you right now, here, in public, for having attacked the Unicode Consortium as perpetrating “institutional racism”. The Unicode Consortium, along with ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2, maintains the Universal Character Set, known as the Unicode Standard and ISO/IEC 10646. This standard has nothing whatever to do with the language codes of ISO 639.
Willing to do that if I see constructive approach in the case of Mapudungun.
You should do it out of shame.
So, we are stuck.