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(a)googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] List of Wikimedia projects and languages
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
<foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID:
<CAL0e-KUQ2qzzQyVR2aYvY5eFxqLyNWWcBPFEE6k7qCFNS7LsRQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
2011/7/11 emijrp <emijrp(a)gmail.com>om>:
@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.
------------------------------