Re "The problem are those people who can't read." One of my concerns is that in setting our target at the world population we inevitably set ourselves up to fail - though I accept that arbitrary minimum reading ages are of little use, and the youngest 10% of a population can mean the under tens or the under 4s.
But I don't think we should be to concerned about literacy by 2050. Someone is bound to have designed a proper speech based interface by then.
WereSpielChequers
Message: 8 Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 13:14:21 +0200 From: Thomas Goldammer thogol@googlemail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] List of Wikimedia projects and languages To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: CAL0e-KUQ2qzzQyVR2aYvY5eFxqLyNWWcBPFEE6k7qCFNS7LsRQ@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
2011/7/11 emijrp emijrp@gmail.com:
@Thomas and @Andre: I know that it is very hard to mantain a Wikipedia in 'remote' or 'almost extinct' languages, but, if we don't save as much as we can of them (including words, grammar, culture, social values), how are we going to offer 'all human knowledge' ?
We offer this knowledge by having articles about the grammar, culture and social values of these languages, and by having wiktionary entries for the words of these languages. We do not need to have the human knowledge *in* these languages. It would be nice, but it's not necessary to reach the ultimate goal to offer all human knowledge.
How many people don't understand any Wikipedia today?
Of those who can read at all, probably much less than 1%. The problem are those people who can't read.
Th.