I would like to retract the attached email as it seems like there are
actually no current request for a code for Hainanese that I was mixing
something else up with it
2018-01-30 TUE Phake Nick <c933103(a)gmail.com> wrote:
One thing to consider:
- In the previous code application, Hainanese was mentioned as a thing to
consider about before splitting out Teochew. There are currently request
for a code for Hainanese which will probably take some times to handle, and
I would not expect request for Teochew to surface before that one get
created
2018年1月29日 18:26 於 "Steven White" <Koala19890(a)hotmail.com> 寫道:
> OK. I'm assuming that (a) the concept of closing stale requests as I've
> proposed is generally acceptable, and (b) that at least in the cases other
> than Teochew I can proceed.
>
>
> With respect to Teochew, I'm going to mark it as "on hold/waiting",
> pending a language code. But if we don't see a new request at SIL in a
> year, then I'm going to close. Please let me know if that is acceptable.
>
>
> There are, in fact, a couple of other requests from 2010 still open.
> There are two requests on different Balochi projects, which I thought
> should wait until Satdeep finished his investigations into that. There is a
> request for "Southern Min in Hanji," which I intended to leave sitting
> until we had a discussion of when different scripts need different projects
> and when not. But apparently phabricator T165882
> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T165882> says that the community has
> agreed to a namespace for Hanji, so this can be closed as resolved. There
> is a request for Wiktionary Pitcairnese
>
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wiktionary_Pitcairnese>
> that can be closed as stale along the same lines as the others here. And
> there is a request for Wikipedia Chinuk wawa that is supported by a few
> pages in the Incubator, so I'm going to mark it eligible.
>
>
> Steven
>
>
> Sent from Outlook <http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Langcom <langcom-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of
> langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org <langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> *Sent:* Friday, January 26, 2018 7:00 AM
> *To:* langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> *Subject:* Langcom Digest, Vol 52, Issue 24
>
> Send Langcom mailing list submissions to
> langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
>
https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.wik…
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> langcom-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Langcom digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Final group of projects with requests lingering since
> 2010 (Phake Nick)
> 2. Re: Final group of projects with requests lingering since
> 2010 (MF-Warburg)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:53:21 +0800
> From: Phake Nick <c933103(a)gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee
> <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Langcom] Final group of projects with requests lingering
> since 2010
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAGHjPP+tUooqAWcJdrKA+nYNZY3Qi+MZnrJquY0ywOVYamSKfA(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> 2018年1月25日 03:49 於 "MF-Warburg" <mfwarburg(a)googlemail.com> 寫道:
> >
> > Well, but it's equally true (and written) that "If there is no valid
ISO
> 639 code, you must obtain one. The Wikimedia Foundation does not seek to
> develop new linguistic entities".
>
> My understanding on the description of "does not seek to develop new
> linguistic entities" is that WMF does not seek to develop new language and
> thus it would like confirmation from ISO standard regulation body, instead
> of the code itself.
>
> > We do absolutely not want to invent our own codes, because that gets
> really messy, especially when at some point a language does get a real
> code.
>
> Why not tentatively use e.g. ISO639-6 code as a working code in incubator
> or for the project before it could get a 639-1/2/3 code? after it get a
> code in ISO 639-1/2/3 then it should be possible to move things over.
> Although all the code change requests have been piled up for years in
> phabricator but that should hopefully be sorted out one day.
>