Please let me restate a couple of key points about my suggestion that people seem not to have picked up:
* I have not proposed this as a substitute for a community's trying to get its code changed. This is intended to be a workaround in the event that is not possible. * I explicitly stated that the requirement remain that an ISO 639–3 code exists. If a language has no ISO 639–3 code, it does not get an Incubator test, and it does not get a subdomain project. Period. * I am quite sensitive to the fact that we don't want to make independent judgments as to what is or is not a language. So no code, no test. That does not change. * This is only intended for cases where the community itself has a code already, but finds its code offensive. It's up to LangCom to decide whether the request is legitimate or frivolous. I would assume that LangCom would take a pretty narrow view of this, requiring there to be some well-established history behind the request. I wouldn't presume to tell you what that has to look like, but perhaps at minimum there has to have been a request to SIL to change the code first, even if that request was denied. * Based on the rules above, I see no possibility of a sustained flood of applications from groups that lack a language code. If there is briefly such a flood, it will become clear quickly that such applications will be summarily denied, and that will take care of that. * If there are more requests from groups whose existing codes are based on exonyms that would prefer a change—but the request goes no farther than a preference–just say no.
Thank you for listening. Steven
Sent from Outlookhttp://aka.ms/weboutlook
Hoi, There is no point of having a project in the incubator that will not be published as a Wikipedia because it is highly unlikely that we will get consensus or a qualified majority for such a thing. It is not honest nor fair to raise expectations that we will not fulfil. Thanks, GerardM
On 18 May 2017 at 19:25, Steven White Koala19890@hotmail.com wrote:
Please let me restate a couple of key points about my suggestion that people seem not to have picked up:
- I have not proposed this as a substitute for a community's trying to
get its code changed. This is intended to be a workaround in the event that is not possible.
- *I explicitly stated that the requirement remain that an ISO 639–3
code exists. If a language has no ISO 639–3 code, it does not get an Incubator test, and it does not get a subdomain project. Period.* - I am quite sensitive to the fact that we don't want to make independent judgments as to what is or is not a language. So no code, no test. That does not change.
- This is *only* intended for cases where the community itself has a
code already, but finds its code offensive. It's up to LangCom to decide whether the request is legitimate or frivolous. I would assume that LangCom would take a pretty narrow view of this, requiring there to be some well-established history behind the request. I wouldn't presume to tell you what that has to look like, but perhaps at minimum there has to have been a request to SIL to change the code first, even if that request was denied.
- Based on the rules above, I see no possibility of a sustained flood
of applications from groups that lack a language code. If there is briefly such a flood, it will become clear quickly that such applications will be summarily denied, and that will take care of that. - If there are more requests from groups whose existing codes are based on exonyms that would *prefer* a change—but the request goes no farther than a preference–just say no.
Thank you for listening. Steven
Sent from Outlook http://aka.ms/weboutlook
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
There is no point of having a project in the incubator that will not be published as a Wikipedia because it is highly unlikely that we will get consensus or a qualified majority for such a thing. It is not honest nor fair to raise expectations that we will not fulfil.
Nothing unusual for somebody who is willing to find excuses for Zwarte Piet.