[Foundation-l] Community draft of language proposal policy

[Tim Starling]

Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> On Meta you replaced the ISO-639-3 requirement with an RFC 4646 requirement.
> These  things are incompatible. 

No, on meta I removed the ISO 639-3 requirement entirely. I replaced the
ISO 639 code in the request section with "RFC 4646 code (if available)".

In another post:
> Acceptance of the RFC 4646 as the standard to go by would mean that we split
> the en.wikipedia.org in the many variants accepted under this standard. Not
> a good idea you will agree.

No, I'm not suggesting that we use RFC 4646 in the same way that you have
been using ISO 639-3. I'm suggesting that we make our own decisions on
which languages should be included, independently of any standards body.
An RFC 4646 code is useful, if there is one, but it shouldn't be necessary.

-- Tim Starling