Then explain it.
2017-06-13 7:15 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com:
Hoi, Yes you do. Thanks, GerardM
On 13 June 2017 at 04:42, MF-Warburg mfwarburg@googlemail.com wrote:
The proposal exactly is that the eligibility of such languages should be decided by a (simple majority) vote. Or do I misunderstand the objection?
2017-05-19 3:32 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson everson@evertype.com:
I agree with Gerard. A primary code in BPC 47 would be a rarity, and not something to be adopted here without a proper vote.
Michael Everson
On 19 May 2017, at 01:24, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
I do not support the Notion of a simple majority When there is no
ISO639 3. I want arguments and eventualy a vote.
Thanks, GerardM
Op vr 19 mei 2017 om 01:08 schreef MF-Warburg <
mfwarburg@googlemail.com>
Forgot one important point:
:''Eligibility of a language without a valid ISO 639-3 code, but with
a valid BCP 47 code.''
This would be a novelty.
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom