The difference is that grc.wp, unlike als.wp, would not be squatting on a space that could potentially be used by another language. If you presume that it is impossible to write an encyclopedia in the language designated by grc.wp, which I still think is an absurd argument, then I don't see the problem with letting the code be used for... well, whatever you want to call it.
As far as making up fake codes, codes like map-bms or lat-smg do not do the type of potential future damage that als.wp does. There is no potential for harm of any type, there is no squatting at somebody else's code.
Mark
On 18/04/2008, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, It is NOT easy to change codes. Just consider the tragic story of the als.wikipedia.org a project that is squatting on the code for the most relevant Albanian language. We have asked this to be resolved for more then a year. As to the ISO process, I know how long on average it takes, I made it my business to know.
It is not acceptable to me to have projects that suggest to be one thing while in fact they are not. Ancient Greek is an historic language and as such it is no longer spoken. Either get its definition changed or get another code. Thanks, GerardM
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Pharos pharosofalexandria@gmail.com
wrote:
If you believe it would happen so soon (which I am quite pessimistic about, especially for the multiplicity of languages this might apply to), then why not allow these Wikipedias to exist under the "wrong" code for so short a time?
It would be easy to move them afterward, and you would find no opposition to moving them then. If Pathoschild would agree to this, would it be amenable to you as well?
Thanks, Pharos
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 3:22 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, I spoke with the convener of the ISO working group that includes the
ISO-639
codes. I spoke with someone from SIL. Not vague at all. When you
suggest
that it takes 10 years, you do not know what your talking about.. One
year
is more like it. It does not preclude continued work on the Incubator..
The English Wikipedia is not a good example.. comparing it with the
Latin
Wikipedia is a more reasonable comparison.
Again, there is no urgency and there is certainly no rush. Given Pathoschild's stance I am the closest that you have to ever getting an
Old
Greek project in the first place. Thanks, GerardM
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 9:14 AM, Pharos pharosofalexandria@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, The policy warts and all is clearly beneficial. We are discussing
a
corner
case, this is how to deal with reconstructed languages. One of the
things
that we have is time. There is time to get a code for a
reconstructed
language, there is no urgency.
The English Wikipedia has been built in 7 years. Just 7 years, and look at all that has been accomplished.
Despite some vague conversation you report here, I see no sign of likelihood at all that the ISO is going to open up to your unprecedented requirement of a unique "reconstructed" code, a requirement that only you among the people in this discussion seem to consider significant. And if it ever were implemented in the medium term, it might be on a one-time basis for Greek, while not addressing the larger issue.
Which does not mean that we couldn't move over to a "reconstructed" code later if one was ever implemented.
But I assert that there -is- an urgency now. Waiting 10 years should not be an option. We would lose -far- too many good encyclopedia-writing hours.
Thanks, Pharos
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l