[Foundation-l] Fwd: ISO 639 JAC decision re mo/mol

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
We explicitly are not involved in any issue that has not to do with the
process of starting new projects in new languages or existing languages.

There are several issues that are not dealt with as a result. However, these
issues are not within the remit of the language committee.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Chad <innocentkiller at gmail.com> wrote:

> I would think the LangCom has the enduring responsibility of dealing with
> all
> projects/languages, pre-LangCom or not. Seems to me that language-related
> issues are under LangCom :)
>
> -Chad
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > Moldavian was created before the start of the language committee.. so no
> > responsibility at all for the language committee; it was not involved.
> > Thanks,
> >      GerardM
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 4:52 PM, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > 2008/11/3 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > With the ISO 639-3 standard we have the best standard that is
> > available.
> > > It
> > > > is the only standard that ties in with what we do; publish on the
> > > Internet.
> > > > When you know about the policies of the language committee, you would
> > > know
> > > > that it only expresses opinions about requests for new projects and
> > > > languages. The question of what I personally find is not that
> relevant
> > as
> > > a
> > > > consequence.
> > > >
> > > > I am not interested into our Moldavian issue per se, I have found and
> I
> > > > still find that it is very much a political issue. An issue that has
> > been
> > > > dealt with by the closure of the wiki. When I look at how comparable
> > > > situations were dealt with elsewhere, I am not impressed. Let it be
> > clear
> > > > that the mo code is still legal. It may still be used.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >      Gerard
> > >
> > > So you are taking the collective responsibility route? Have the other
> > > memebers agreed to this?
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > geni
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>