Well, fair enough - LFN has an ISO 639-3 code and thus is technically eligible. However, how would it reasonably fulfill the criterion of native speaker editors? I'm even more doubtful than what Amir and Anthony expressed. I don't see how LFN can be sustainable enough to ever be allowed to leave the incubator. Sorry for my obstinacy.
On 31-Jan-17 19:00, Michael Everson wrote:
Klingon has a ridiculously limited vocabulary. LFN is as interesting and useful as Esperanto, and has a large and preactical vocabulary. I favour inclusiveness. It costs us little.
On 31 Jan 2017, at 17:48, Oliver Stegen oliver_stegen@sil.org wrote:
Please note that SIL accepted a change request (submitted by the inventor of this language, cf. http://www-01.sil.org/iso639-3/cr_files/2007-144.pdf) but Ethnologue did not include lfn in their editions ever.
So? That’s Ethnologue’s business.
Given that LFN has a wiki on Wikia (cf. http://lfn.wikia.com/wiki/Paje_xef), I don't see why we should accept it as a Wikimedia project. Let it go the way of Klingon ...
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom