Daniel Mayer wrote:
Thus a language-selection portal would be
appropriate and expected for the
foundation website. Not having it right away is simply due to the lack
of a
technically and aesthetically good implementation. A side benefit of
creating
such a portal would be adapting it for use at
www.wikipedia.org and
other www
wikimedia project domains.
Unless we can get everyone translated accurately pretty quickly, we
might want to still give English primacy as the language in which
Foundation business is conducted. This wouldn't be related to where the
Foundation is incorporated, just due to the fact that if we were to list
all languages that members understand at least somewhat, English would
almost certainly come out ahead by far, and it's the language most
commonly used for cross-borders business these days outside of Wikipedia
as well. (If at some point it turns out that everyone learns Esperanto,
I'd be happy to move to that; or if people learn Latin again, we could
move back to using Latin as the international language of
correspondence, but for now it seems English has more speakers than any
of the alternatives).
Of course, instant high-quality translations would be even better, but
especially for sensitive things we have to be careful that the
translations actually all capture the same nuances of meaning.
-Mark
Nod. I agree with this. I prefer english, at least for now.
But I think that if some people have strong opinion one way or another,
I will be glad to settle on the leading opinion, portal or english per
default.