Hoi, The interface of MediaWiki is right to left or left to right. With ASL it has to be top down. This is something that has never been considered. I have asked for ASL to become a full project so that the issues can be properly seen, diagnosed and remedied. It will be supported by the SignWriting Foundation. There is no chance that it will be abandoned and it is imho enough reason to allow for it to be created at this time. Thanks, GerardM On 31 May 2016 at 15:40, Michael Everson <everson(a)evertype.com> wrote:

Browsers indeed have already implemented some support for top-down writing. But as it is with right-to-left languages, browsers only provide some infrastructure, and the web developers have to actually use it. For RTL in MediaWiki it's CSSJanus and a lot of little tweaks all over the place. For SignWriting I haven't looked into details yet, but I suppose that it's comparable. -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com ‪“We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬ 2016-05-31 8:21 GMT-07:00 Purodha Blissenbach <purodha(a)blissenbach.org>rg>:

Hoi, There are several parts to this. There is the technical part of it. There is the principle behind my stance. When you look at a page in the asl incubator [1] it is full of English and we do want a complete UI in ASL. I have no clue how an ASL UI should look and we will never figure it out without an environment that is completely top down. The notion that I should comment on Phabricator is something I reject. It is not an environment that I frequent. It has everything to do with the fact that it did not work well for me in the past. The second part is that it has been argued before that we should be more forthcoming in enabling new projects. This project has two arguments going for it. The technical one and the fact that an organisation supports it and will not abandon it. Yair and Steve are of that organisation and community. I have argued before that when a credible organisation supports a language, an organisation that has no POV as far as content is concerned, we can be more forthcoming. When Milos argues that my position was rather strong on something in the past, he does not provide an argument that is relevant to this case. I therefore ignore it. I do have sufficient experience in computing to know that it is not trivial to solve all the technical issues. I am disappointed in the use of the flexibility that we have in our policy and at some stage I have to decide how to spend my time. When it is proven to me yet again how inflexible we are I fail to see a benefit of my involvement. Thanks, GerardM [1] https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/ase/M510x546S20320495x455S1fb20495x… On 31 May 2016 at 19:36, Amir E. Aharoni <amir.aharoni(a)mail.huji.ac.il> wrote: