+1

Thanks, MF, for working Gerard's comments into the new policy draft so sensibly and sensitively!
No further comments or changes from my side - I'd be happy to approve those new rules.

Oliver

On 04-Jul-17 13:31, MF-Warburg wrote:

Are there further comments about this? I'd invite those of you who want to change parts of the policy to edit <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_committee/Voting_policy> directly to address your concerns.

2017-06-13 19:20 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>:

On 13 Jun 2017, at 06:58, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hoi,
> First there is no agreement.

Not sure what you are talking about.

> Second, for ISO-639-3 languages that are living languages there is no need for a vote.

That’s our rules, yes.

> Third, for other ISO-639-3 languages there is a need for a vote.

I suppose there are living languages with few if any users and other languages with potentially very many.

> Compelling arguments are needed and a two third majority is reasonable.

What does everyone feel about this?

> Fourth for codes that do not have an ISO-639-3 code the standard answer is no. Without proper arguments this should not happen.

And this is the BPC 47 thing. That’s a very important and widely-implemented standard. If the 639 Agency had refused Elfdalian, we would have created a primary tag for it. That would be a situation where a non-standard answer might be useful.

Michael

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom

Virus-free. www.avg.com

_______________________________________________
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