Re: [geolang-comment] Scripts, charsets, media types? (was: Quo vadis,GeoLang?)

[Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@garshol.priv.no>]

* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| I think they are in scope, the question is really if they are
| important enough to warrant inclusion.

* John Cowan
| 
| I think:
| 
| if (important) include();
| else if (!important && !difficult) include();
| else exclude();

I agree in principle, though I worry slightly about the PR effect of
an OASIS TC publishing lots of PSI sets that clearly nobody's ever
going to use. 

But unless someone protests I think we'll just do it.
 
| These sets are not difficult: they don't have very many associated
| facts, and they are as you say in scope, at least marginally.

Agreed. 
  
* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| This one I think is outside scope, however. It's not geography, nor is
| it linguistic. Both of the above are linguistic, or at least clearly
| related to linguistic information.
| 
| The problem is that it would probably be a quite useful PSI set.  I'm
| not sure what to do about that.
 
* John Cowan
|
| Umm, redefine our scope?  

Uh, yes, there's always that option. I'd very much prefer not to,
frankly.

One possibility would be for someone to do it outside OASIS. If people
start using it we could point to that and say, look, this is an
important code set, we should cover it.

Or, we could just make a note of this, and once we've collected some
more out-of-scope-but-still-useful-sets we can sit down and consider
what to do. That seems like the most likely option right now.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >