Re: [geolang-comment] New PSI set draft

[John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>]

Lars Marius Garshol scripsit:

>   - What to do about 'mul' and 'und'? Are these instances of any
>     class? Should we include them at all?

They are not instances of either class, IMHO.  I don't care if they are
left in or taken out.

>   - What to do about the metadata in parentheses following each
>     language? Should those be part of the base name in the XTM, or
>     should they be moved to an internal occurrence of some sort?

Part of the basename.  They are essential information to the identification.

>   - What to do about the cases where multiple names are separated by
>     semicolons? Should we keep it as one base name, or split into
>     multiple base names? Should there be any scopes on the names?

Multiple base names (they are spelling variants).

>   - Need a change policy, plus an update policy. This is the biggest
>     issue, and one that could keep us busy for a while. There has been
>     one change to ISO 639 since the previous draft.

Umm, "change when ISO 639 changes"?

-- 
John Cowan  jcowan@reutershealth.com  www.ccil.org/~cowan  www.reutershealth.com
"The competent programmer is fully aware of the strictly limited size of his own
skull; therefore he approaches the programming task in full humility, and among
other things he avoids clever tricks like the plague."  --Edsger Dijkstra