On Jan 15, 2008 8:25 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, I tried to point out to you personally how the policy is consistent in time. I also explained why the policy is reasonable. As I have said the same things now several times, I do not want to repeat the things publicly again unless there is a new point to clarify.
It is your wishes not mine. And if you think it is enough to persuade me to cover your inequity for all Japanese people involved into Wiversity sorry I disagree.
There is no reason to hide it in a cupboard. And I esteem transparency.
And if there is any new point - you still haven't provide why inequity between Greeks and Japanese justified.
Because of my respect to you I have endeavoured to word things differently and more personally. I do not do that for many others. :)
1. I don't have an interest to discuss with you as individual. I ask Langcom for their opinion as Wikimedia Committee. Not you individual. Hence your wish for private conversation is irrelevant. 2. As a committee member, I rather wish you esteem the all Wikiversity people, not your preferring individuals. And as a committee member you should do, imo.
PS my name is Gerard not Gerald :)
Sorry, it is hard for native Japanese speaker to distinguish them.
Thanks, Gerard
On Jan 15, 2008 11:45 AM, Aphaia aphaia@gmail.com wrote:
Back to foundation-l.
Gerald, I have no idea why you mailed me privately and in that mail you didn't respond any of my specific questions.
I think I tried to ask politely LangCom for the inconsistency in GeraldM's messages and ask GeraldM himself to clarify what is his standpoint?
In this context what means a privately sent mail?
In both points a reasonable public clear response in an appropriate manner will be appreciated.
On Jan 15, 2008 6:55 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi, The policy was recently changed. All the languages that were at that
time
approved or were in the process of being approved do not have to comply
with
the new standard. The process of being approved starts when a member of
the
langcom asks other members of the langcom for approval for a project.
This
is often communicated privately with people representing the new
project.
We need full localisation for all languages. For Greek, for Japanese ... without full localisation important messages will not be available and consequently when new software is introduced there will be a lot of uncertainty. The messages for Single User Logon are in an exension. They
are
extremely relevant when SUL goes life. We do not require any extension messages for a first project in a language because we trust the
community to
do well and translate them in BetaWIki. Often these messages are
translated
in the local project.
With a second project in a language it becomes even more important that
the
localisation is done centrally and this is the reason for the new requirement. It is hard work to maintain the localisation. When the localisation is only done in the biggest project. The smaller projects
lose
out.
I hope you will appreciate that this policy only aims to improve the localisation in all languages for us all. If anything the policy and the hard work at BetaWiki have shown to have a good effect. Things have
already
improved quite substantially over the last few months.
Thanks, Gerard
Thanks, Gerard
On Jan 15, 2008 10:40 AM, Aphaia < aphaia@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 15, 2008 4:26 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi, Several members of the language committee are extremely unhappy with Pathoschild's sorry show of doing this on his own accord. They have indicated that they will block final approval for any project by
going
back
on this necessary part of the policy.
Unless one other member of Langcom gives their understanding, I think it wise not to comment to this part of your statement.
And I take it strangely you speak without clarification as whom you are talking. I don't want an opinion of certain individual on his individual basis. I asked opinion of Langcom.
Do you speak here on behalf of Langcom based on consensus?
Again, there are two parts to the policy.
- When a language is starting it only needs to do the most used
messages
of
MediaWiki. This provides basic support for a language.
- When a project request is a subsequent project for a language, all
MediaWiki messages and the messages of the extension used by the WMF
are
required.
[snip]
It is exactly for languages that use a different script that it is
vital
that the localisation is done completely. For these languages there
is
no
chance that the English word is the same or similar.
Your argument here again become pointless. "A different script" is unclear and a-certain-but-not-clear-language-centric. Even if I assume you wanted to mean "a different language from MediaWiki default = latin script", it is still pointless and give no insight of differences Langcom set between Greek (Greek script, not latin) and Japanese (Kana and Kanji). And I would politely add Greek is not English word.
Shortly your argument doesn't provide any good reason for your favor to Greek project.
MediaWiki is an integral part of how we provide our information. It
needs as
much tender loving care as we give to our content. MediaWiki
receives a
lot
of tender loving care from the developers. We can show our
appreciation
by
making sure that their software is properly understood and
appreciated
by
all its users not only for the people that know English and get
everything
by default.
Again I should ask you: who are we? Specially if Pathoschild pointed out flows in your wording?
Thanks, GerardM
On Jan 15, 2008 12:08 AM, Jesse Martin (Pathoschild)
<pathoschild@gmail.com >
wrote:
Aphaia, I'm sorry; I looked at the localization for Japanese, and
it
seems that this problem is caused by a change that happened a few
days
ago in the requirements. I've reverted them and brought them up
for
subcommittee discussion again (I hadn't commented on them, because
it
didn't seem from the proposal that they'd make much difference).
I'll
keep you updated off-list.
Yaroslav, as far as I know (I don't participate on that page)
those
numbers are only there to give a general idea of the discussion.
Since
they're manually updated, they're probably outdated most of the
time.
-- Yours cordially, Jesse Martin (Pathoschild)
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- KIZU Naoko http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese) Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
KIZU Naoko http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese) Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l