Hi All
Can I clear any doubt on Burmese Localization Situation.
*anyone can use any myanmar Unicode 5.1 - compliant font to look at it.*
For Burmese, It's different from English situation. Microsoft Windows XP and older operating system are widely used by Burmese People. Microsoft Windows Vista natively support Burmese Rendering. Ubuntu 8.04 natively support Burmese Rendering. Main Problem is lack of rendering support by Microsoft Windows older version. We have to patch/update Uniscribe Rendering Engine in older Operating System. That's technical issues.
*If there are Unicode 5.1 fonts, perhaps incomplete, perhaps complete, then fine. People can use those.*
Absolutely, There are no problem concern with fonts. There are 3 Unicode Fonts for Burmese. At First, my.wikipedia.org is not suited for other ethnics characters and Buddhist teaching concern. That's fine. Why we need to wait anymore. But for the Zawgyi fans and old operating system users might not be seen proper Burmese characters because encoding standards are different from Zawgyi and Unicode 4.1 What ever we need to think long run. I strongly recommended to store Unicode 5.1.
*What would the problem be with this? Would it render the site unusable for people who are using only Zawgyi?*
We should support any Wikipedian who are willing to write with any font/encoding. But we can convert those input texts with different encoding by internal converter. It's meaning to say Zawgyi text can be converted into Unicode 5.1. I suppose to do accessibility problem is key issues for every language. Michael figured out that multiple platform would be fine. I would like to propose again that multiple font encoding must support in my.wikipedia.org
Be clear enough. I do not support storing non-Unicode 5.1 Standards. But we must support converted HTML in Zawgyi, MyaZedi and such dated Fonts.
Well, Here is solution to put converter in wiki. http://mmbotconvert.vndv.com/ It's off-line converter for Zawgyi<>Unicode 5.1. It can be engaged with Wiki Textbox. Let me explain 1 scenario, A Wikipedian will go Myanmar CyberCafe. Cybercafe may not allow to install Unicode 5.1 Fonts. But In their machine, They installed Zawgyi Font. So, Our proposed solution is to easily access with installed fonts.
How can we solve user accessibility issues? Only Javascirpt file, It should be attached in MediaWiki. We have accomplished converter development in javascript. We are going to test unit testing in Myanmar Orthography List. So, you may clear that why we are taking care on non-Unicode Fonts. We had solution to convert those thing.
So, There are no problem in Fonts. Only problem in accessibility issues.
Thanks for your time and effort on Myanmar Wikipedia.
Ngwe Tun
2008/7/25 Ngwe Tun ngwestar@gmail.com:
Hi All
Can I clear any doubt on Burmese Localization Situation.
*anyone can use any myanmar Unicode 5.1 - compliant font to look at it.*
For Burmese, It's different from English situation. Microsoft Windows XP and older operating system are widely used by Burmese People. Microsoft Windows Vista natively support Burmese Rendering. Ubuntu 8.04 natively support Burmese Rendering. Main Problem is lack of rendering support by Microsoft Windows older version. We have to patch/update Uniscribe Rendering Engine in older Operating System. That's technical issues.
My current understanding is that usp10.dll is protected by Microsoft's EULA which prohibits copying usp10.dll onto a computer. Some developers can license usp10.dll but only for local use with their application, the license prohibts them from replacing the system version of usp10.dll
There are also issues with font fallback mechanisms. As Michael pointed out, you'd have disasterous results if the fallback selected a pre-Unicode 5.1 font implementation.
In theory a user could select a default font for a script in their web browser's preferences/options. A few barriers exist. Firefox has no UI mechanism to select to specify a default Myanmar script font. Selecting a default font in the Windows version of Internet Explorer is inhibited due to a long standing bug in mlang.dll, IE will not recognise a Myanmar Script font. The only remedy is to edit the Windows registry. A task that the average user may not be able to perform.
The only real solution is to handle font fall back through CSS, identifying the most suitable and most commonly available of the Unicode 5.1 fonts and specifying each within a CSS rule.
Andrew
At 07:45 -0400 2008-07-25, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Andrew Cunningham wrote:
The only real solution is to handle font fall back through CSS, identifying the most suitable and most commonly available of the Unicode 5.1 fonts and specifying each within a CSS rule.
Who can make that happen?
Htoo Myint Naung and I had proposed to do so when I wrote to you at the end of May. You may be a little behind me in reading mails on this list though.. earlier this morning I wrote this:
I've suggested getting my.wiki sorted out so that it is user friendly in terms of getting people fonts and input methods (like the Kannada and/or Telugu sites do). I think we should investigate compliant fonts and their capabilities, put them in the CSS ranked in terms of universality, clean up what needs cleaning up, and then work on the conversion of the other material.
Yes, I am caught up now. It sounds like you and Andrew agree.
okisan, do you agree?
Michael Everson wrote:
At 07:45 -0400 2008-07-25, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Andrew Cunningham wrote:
The only real solution is to handle font fall back through CSS, identifying the most suitable and most commonly available of the Unicode 5.1 fonts and specifying each within a CSS rule.
Who can make that happen?
Htoo Myint Naung and I had proposed to do so when I wrote to you at the end of May. You may be a little behind me in reading mails on this list though.. earlier this morning I wrote this:
I've suggested getting my.wiki sorted out so that it is user friendly in terms of getting people fonts and input methods (like the Kannada and/or Telugu sites do). I think we should investigate compliant fonts and their capabilities, put them in the CSS ranked in terms of universality, clean up what needs cleaning up, and then work on the conversion of the other material.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 9:04 PM, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Yes, I am caught up now. It sounds like you and Andrew agree.
okisan, do you agree?
If he REALLY means it, it has already been done and we don't have to go this much of conversation.
Okisan
At 10:17 +0630 2008-07-25, Ngwe Tun wrote:
For Burmese, It's different from English situation. Microsoft Windows XP and older operating system are widely used by Burmese People.
Yes, and they have to migrate to Unicode 5.1. Otherwise we will simply have continued encoding chaos on my.wiki. I don't see any other option.
*If there are Unicode 5.1 fonts, perhaps incomplete, perhaps complete, then fine. People can use those.*
Absolutely, There are no problem concern with fonts. There are 3 Unicode Fonts for Burmese. At First, http://my.wikipedia.orgmy.wikipedia.org is not suited for other ethnics characters and Buddhist teaching concern. That's fine.
Excuse me, but I object here. The Myamnar block in Unicode contains many characters. Some are used in Sanskrit in Burmese. Some are used in minority languages. "Buddhist teaching concerns" are legitimate articles for the Myanmar Wikipedia, and users may wish to cite Sanskrit words there. So you cannot say that the Sanskrit characters in Unicode are irrelevant or should be ignored. They may be part of data. Some Unicode 5.1 fonts support this behaviour, some do not. I have proposed to Wikimedia that we investigate what level of support each font has so that users can choose which ones they want. This is POSITIVE comptetition. A font (let's say Padauk or Parabaik) which doesn't correctly render a Sanskrit word might be improved. Or it might have fallback rendering. But at least we would know.
Similarly, the Myanmar scripts minority characters may find their way into texts on the Myanmar wikipedia. Look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorsteinn_P%C3%A1lsson and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilham_Aliyev and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lech_Walesa. Each of these men uses letters in his name which are unrecognized by English speakers. Yet those letters are used in the English wikipedia -- sometimes for the article title, sometimes just in the text. So when Ngwe Tun says that "http://my.wikipedia.orgmy.wikipedia.org is not suited for other ethnics characters" I cannot agree with him. Font developers should be encouraged to support the whole block of Myanmar characters, at least at some level. If not, then we can state so, and users can choose the fonts they wish.
Why we need to wait anymore. But for the Zawgyi fans and old operating system users might not be seen proper Burmese characters because encoding standards are different from Zawgyi and Unicode 4.1 What ever we need to think long run. I strongly recommended to store Unicode 5.1.
On this Ngew Tun and I are agreed. :-)
*What would the problem be with this? Would it render the site unusable for people who are using only Zawgyi?*
We should support any Wikipedian who are willing to write with any font/encoding. But we can convert those input texts with different encoding by internal converter.
That's just going to be
It's meaning to say Zawgyi text can be converted into Unicode 5.1. I suppose to do accessibility problem is key issues for every language. Michael figured out that multiple platform would be fine. I would like to propose again that multiple font encoding must support in http://my.wikipedia.orgmy.wikipedia.org
I don't think this is feasible. You're going to have to have a suite of browser plug-ins (platform specific) which will be smart enough to detect what encoding people are using and convert losslessly back and forth between the encodings. And there are several encodings and pseudo-encodings out there. And then there is the question of when *this* gets phased out in the future. Ten years from now when the last Windows XP computer dies? It just delays the migration. Also what happens when somebody selects text in the browser window and pastes it into an e-mail? You'll have encoding incompatibility there too, and your plug-in will not help you there.
Be clear enough. I do not support storing non-Unicode 5.1 Standards.
Good.
But we must support converted HTML in Zawgyi, MyaZedi and such dated Fonts.
I can't see how this can be supported on the Wiki side.
Well, Here is solution to put converter in wiki. http://mmbotconvert.vndv.com/http://mmbotconvert.vndv.com/ It's off-line converter for Zawgyi<>Unicode 5.1. It can be engaged with Wiki Textbox. Let me explain 1 scenario, A Wikipedian will go Myanmar CyberCafe. Cybercafe may not allow to install Unicode 5.1 Fonts.
The customer should complain.
But In their machine, They installed Zawgyi Font.
They shouldn't. I don't think we should encourage the perpetuation of non-Unicode fonts.
Ngwe Tun wrote:
How can we solve user accessibility issues? Only Javascirpt file, It should be attached in MediaWiki. We have accomplished converter development in javascript. We are going to test unit testing in Myanmar Orthography List. So, you may clear that why we are taking care on non-Unicode Fonts. We had solution to convert those thing.
This sounds simple enough. The javascript already exists, right? And it works? And it will allow people with older browsers to use Wikipedia today, while also providing a sensible path forward for the future?
That sounds wonderful! How can we make that happen on my.wikipedia.org?
--Jimbo
At 07:44 -0400 2008-07-25, Jimmy Wales wrote:
This sounds simple enough. The javascript already exists, right? And it works? And it will allow people with older browsers to use Wikipedia today, while also providing a sensible path forward for the future?
That sounds wonderful! How can we make that happen on my.wikipedia.org?
If you are going to allow "any" UTF-8 font to be used on my.wiki then I do not see how I can be of service to you. What I can do is help to ensure that we know what the capabilities of Unicode-5.1 compliant fonts are, and to ensure that compliant fonts are listed in a reasoned order in the CSS. What is being suggested here sounds as though it would simply perpetuate and encourage the use of non-standard fonts. I don't believe that is the right thing to do, and it will just cause more work later.
Michael Everson wrote:
At 07:44 -0400 2008-07-25, Jimmy Wales wrote:
This sounds simple enough. The javascript already exists, right? And it works? And it will allow people with older browsers to use Wikipedia today, while also providing a sensible path forward for the future?
That sounds wonderful! How can we make that happen on my.wikipedia.org?
If you are going to allow "any" UTF-8 font to be used on my.wiki then I do not see how I can be of service to you. What I can do is help to ensure that we know what the capabilities of Unicode-5.1 compliant fonts are, and to ensure that compliant fonts are listed in a reasoned order in the CSS. What is being suggested here sounds as though it would simply perpetuate and encourage the use of non-standard fonts. I don't believe that is the right thing to do, and it will just cause more work later.
Well, let me be clearer on what I am suggesting.
If there are people who are simply unable to upgrade or able but don't know how, I think we should find a way to accomodate them while at the same time encouraging them to upgrade. Everything should be stored in a Unicode-5.1 compliant way, and then input method used for those on older systems should strictly enforce this.
This is a question of effectiveness. Is it more effective to simply switch to a system on Wikipedia that many people are unable to use at all, or is it more effective to get those people involved in writing content that will be valuable for the future while teaching and educating them (and turning them into sales people for upgrading!)?
I will say this much, though: allowing people to use an input method which "breaks" anything is absolutely something I would oppose, because that would create more work later. So I think we agree on that part.
The part where we may not agree is in the area of: what do we tell people on the site who do not have a system which can do things in the modern way?
1. Go away, you have an old computer - not welcoming 2. Go to this other site and work in the old way, make friends with a different community, do work that probably replicates work done on the real site, etc. - the worst possibility, because we will never unite the communities in the end, trust me, I know about this 3. Welcome! Here is how you can input using your old system, but really you should upgrade. Please upgrade. Here is how. Please upgrade. You can keep doing this for now but it is old-fashioned. Please upgrade.
--Jimbo
At 08:10 -0400 2008-07-25, Jimmy Wales wrote:
If there are people who are simply unable to upgrade or able but don't know how, I think we should find a way to accomodate them while at the same time encouraging them to upgrade.
I see. For how long?
Everything should be stored in a Unicode-5.1 compliant way, and then input method used for those on older systems should strictly enforce this.
I understand. Certainly the same problem has been encountered in India. But on the Tamil Wikipedia, for instance, where there are also many legacy fonts and those are not being supported, as far as I can see.
h t t p : / / t a . w i k i p e d i a . o r g / w i k i / µ ø ï Õ ï ø Õ ¿ ü ø Ø æ : F o n t _ h e l p
(If that doesn't work, google "tamil wikipedia" and select the 4th link down which says "Font help".)
This is a question of effectiveness. Is it more effective to simply switch to a system on Wikipedia that many people are unable to use at all, or is it more effective to get those people involved in writing content that will be valuable for the future while teaching and educating them (and turning them into sales people for upgrading!)?
I see your point, though in terms of Zawgyi we have a body of people who philosophically refuse to upgrade.
I will say this much, though: allowing people to use an input method which "breaks" anything is absolutely something I would oppose, because that would create more work later. So I think we agree on that part.
We do.
The part where we may not agree is in the area of: what do we tell people on the site who do not have a system which can do things in the modern way?
- Go away, you have an old computer - not welcoming
- Go to this other site and work in the old
way, make friends with a different community, do work that probably replicates work done on the real site, etc. - the worst possibility, because we will never unite the communities in the end, trust me, I know about this
I daresay you do.
- Welcome! Here is how you can input using
your old system, but really you should upgrade. Please upgrade. Here is how. Please upgrade. You can keep doing this for now but it is old-fashioned. Please upgrade.
I take your point. For inputting. People will still need compliant software to display the compliant fonts, and as you say, Andrew and I agree on how that should be managed.
Michael Everson wrote:
At 08:10 -0400 2008-07-25, Jimmy Wales wrote:
If there are people who are simply unable to upgrade or able but don't know how, I think we should find a way to accomodate them while at the same time encouraging them to upgrade.
I see. For how long?
I think that's an empirical question. If we learned that 99% of all Myanmar users could not use a Unicode 5.1 compliant my.wikipedia.org, then I guess it would be a long time. If we are talking about supporting only 5% of the users, that's different.
I just don't know how widespread the problem might be.
I see your point, though in terms of Zawgyi we have a body of people who philosophically refuse to upgrade.
That's odd. What reasons do they give?
At 08:30 -0400 2008-07-25, Jimmy Wales wrote:
I see your point, though in terms of Zawgyi we have a body of people who philosophically refuse to upgrade.
That's odd. What reasons do they give?
As far as I can see their reason is "It's difficult". http://www.zawgyi.org/usr-Okisan-when%20will%20zawgyi%20be%20unicode%205.1%2...
I don't understand the "font war" really. I just want to see an end to it.
Hi all
2008/7/25 Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com
Michael Everson wrote:
I see your point, though in terms of Zawgyi we have a body of people who philosophically refuse to upgrade.
That's odd. What reasons do they give?
Probably many reasons. Similar to the Vietnamese encoding wars before the widespread adoption of Unicode.
And i suspect that lack of wide spread font rendering/text layout solutions is part of that
But the prevalent use of that font in web pages and blogs is another factor
But as Jimmy commented on about communities building up, I suspect that Zawgyi has had such a similar phenomenon, it is a mechanism of display etxt in various social networks that have evolved on the internet. So people becoem atatched to it.
But proper support of Burmese and minority langauges do call for Unicode 5.1 compliant solutions both short and long term.
As Michael indicates it is important to have solutions in place for Sanskirt and minority langauges as well as Burmese on my.wikipedia.org. To his list i'd also add Pali.
I find myself in a difficult position, working for a state library, a SA. I have to support licesing and copyright. Wether its open source, creative commons, a commercial EULA. And Myanmar Unicode 5.1 solutions are relatively hampered in the Windows environment by licensing issues.
Being involved with W3C inetrnationalisation activities, I strongly support web standards and best practice, esp with respect to internationalisation and accessibility (in its broadest sense) and from that perspective Unicode 5.1 is the best approach.
I'd agrue their should be a single community building articles for wikipedia in Burmese. perosnally transcoding for end users is an posisble interim measure. Although I'd suggets that editors are encouraged and aided in migrating to Unicode 5.1, and that transcoding is left to supporting thaose end users that require it.
Michael and others, I'd like to assist in analysing the fonts and CSS if there is anyway I could help.
At 12:31 +1000 2008-07-26, Andrew Cunningham wrote:
As Michael indicates it is important to have solutions in place for Sanskirt and minority langauges as well as Burmese on http://my.wikipedia.orgmy.wikipedia.org. To his list i'd also add Pali.
Pali rendering requirements are a subset of those in Sanskrit, I believe.
Dear All,
I would like to explain why Myanmar computer users conception on font.
1. As mentioned in Ko Ngwe Tun's previous discussion, we use internet cafe computers and have *less option for installing new fonts or browser based addon*.
2. *Myanmar Unicode has history of breaking previous version and luck of migration support*. It is rather strange that there is NO convertor available for myanmar1 (Unicode 4.0) to myanmar2 (Unicode 4.1) or myanmar2 to myanmar3 (Unicode 5.1). People don't trust to follow Myanmar Unicode now. People even think Unicode Font is government stuff.
3. *Unicode font are not redistributation* (yes wrong, but it is what people think). This result low uptake of Unicode Font on web site. A web site will not be happy to ask visitor to welcome with "please go to this web site to install Unicode 5.1 font". A preferable solution is as provided by Zawgyi publisher that freely redistribute on any web site.
4. *Free Unicode fonts offer low quality. *As webmastering in many web sites, I know all three Unicode 5.1 fonts are not visually acceptable quality.
5. *Unicode font input methods are low quality, extra cost or branding*. Zawgyi uers has long being enjoy phonetic input.
I really think Myanmar Unicode uptake will take a long way, may be two more years at least to change the people perception.
Myanmar Wikipedia should not take the burdon. At bottom line, Wkipedia is providing knowledge, not font. Also people don't think Wikipedia is good enough to install a new font.
One thing to Mr Everson. I know Unicode standard fonts are the way to go and Zawgyi is not. He talked a lot of rubbish. In this mailing list, everybody understand important of Standard. But most don't know is how to make the Standard widely use.
Best regards, Okisan
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Andrew Cunningham lang.support@gmail.comwrote:
Hi all
2008/7/25 Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com
Michael Everson wrote:
I see your point, though in terms of Zawgyi we have a body of people who philosophically refuse to upgrade.
That's odd. What reasons do they give?
Probably many reasons. Similar to the Vietnamese encoding wars before the widespread adoption of Unicode.
And i suspect that lack of wide spread font rendering/text layout solutions is part of that
But the prevalent use of that font in web pages and blogs is another factor
But as Jimmy commented on about communities building up, I suspect that Zawgyi has had such a similar phenomenon, it is a mechanism of display etxt in various social networks that have evolved on the internet. So people becoem atatched to it.
But proper support of Burmese and minority langauges do call for Unicode 5.1 compliant solutions both short and long term.
As Michael indicates it is important to have solutions in place for Sanskirt and minority langauges as well as Burmese on my.wikipedia.org. To his list i'd also add Pali.
I find myself in a difficult position, working for a state library, a SA. I have to support licesing and copyright. Wether its open source, creative commons, a commercial EULA. And Myanmar Unicode 5.1 solutions are relatively hampered in the Windows environment by licensing issues.
Being involved with W3C inetrnationalisation activities, I strongly support web standards and best practice, esp with respect to internationalisation and accessibility (in its broadest sense) and from that perspective Unicode 5.1 is the best approach.
I'd agrue their should be a single community building articles for wikipedia in Burmese. perosnally transcoding for end users is an posisble interim measure. Although I'd suggets that editors are encouraged and aided in migrating to Unicode 5.1, and that transcoding is left to supporting thaose end users that require it.
Michael and others, I'd like to assist in analysing the fonts and CSS if there is anyway I could help.
-- Andrew Cunningham Vicnet Research and Development Coordinator State Library of Victoria Australia
andrewc@vicnet.net.au lang.support@gmail.com
Wikimy-l mailing list Wikimy-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimy-l
At 18:00 +0900 2008-07-26, Kyaw Tun wrote:
Dear All,
I would like to explain why Myanmar computer users conception on font.
I have my doubts as to whether you speak for Myanmar computer users.
- As mentioned in Ko Ngwe Tun's previous
discussion, we use internet cafe computers and have less option for installing new fonts or browser based addon.
IT experts in Myanmar should certainly be encouraging internet cafés to migrate to Unicode 5.1. And if there are Facebook or Flicker sites using non-Unicode encodings, those should also be encouraged to migrate, as Htoo and I have been trying to do with the Wikipedia.
- Myanmar Unicode has history of breaking
previous version and luck of migration support. It is rather strange that there is NO convertor available for myanmar1 (Unicode 4.0) to myanmar2 (Unicode 4.1) or myanmar2 to myanmar3 (Unicode 5.1).
It isn't Unicode's place to make such a converter. The owners of myanmar1, myanmar2, and myanmar3 should have a care for the problem. But there *are* converters available for text conversion.
People don't trust to follow Myanmar Unicode now.
Your website encourages them not to, doesn't it?
People even think Unicode Font is government stuff.
It *is* government stuff, from a certain point of view -- it is an ISO standard. ISO has its mandate from the United Nations. The Union of Myanmar is not a Participating Member in the work of the ISO Subcommittee responsible for the Universal Character set, but your government did send experts (including U Ngwe Tun) to help us do the work, and indeed they invited me to come and help sort the problems out.
- Unicode font are not redistributation (yes
wrong, but it is what people think). This result low uptake of Unicode Font on web site. A web site will not be happy to ask visitor to welcome with "please go to this web site to install Unicode 5.1 font". A preferable solution is as provided by Zawgyi publisher that freely redistribute on any web site.
Zawgyi is by no means "preferable". If you were responsible you would be doing everything you could to withdraw the old Zawgyi encodings and encourage people to use Unicode.
I am sure that Htoo and I will be happy to help convert your font once we have finished with Anawrahta.
(That is a **genuine** offer made in friendship and good faith -- and I make it advisedly, as I am still very angry with you for your slanders about Anawrahta and me and Htoo.)
- Free Unicode fonts offer low quality. As
webmastering in many web sites, I know all three Unicode 5.1 fonts are not visually acceptable quality.
This is your opinion.
- Unicode font input methods are low quality,
extra cost or branding. Zawgyi uers has long being enjoy phonetic input.
Zawgyi users are forced to encode their language texts in a non-standard way. This will only hurt them, and Myanmar, in the long run, as it does in the short run.
I really think Myanmar Unicode uptake will take a long way, may be two more years at least to change the people perception.
You should make it a priority to help change the perception.
Myanmar Wikipedia should not take the burdon. At bottom line, Wkipedia is providing knowledge, not font. Also people don't think Wikipedia is good enough to install a new font.
The Wikimedia Foundation will make a decision as to what they want to do. Htoo and I have made an attempt to get things going.
One thing to Mr Everson. I know Unicode standard fonts are the way to go and Zawgyi is not. He talked a lot of rubbish. In this mailing list, everybody understand important of Standard. But most don't know is how to make the Standard widely use.
Continuing to support Zawgyi encoding isn't the way to do it!
Hi Jimbo,
Yes, you may see link in my previous post. I don't want to involve any discussion. I'm keep trying to make merging media wiki and conversion java script. I've shown to some developer in wikimania 2008. I will finished up in my side first.
I hope to host @ sourceforge first and put it in media wiki as add-ons.
I'm esure that we do not need to argue so much in this discussion. We need to work for Myanmar People. And Please allow me to test our development in myanmarwikipedia.org. It would be our Burmese MediaWiki play ground. After successfully engaged in that web site, I will send those code to media wiki developer.
Best
Ngwe Tun. On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Ngwe Tun wrote:
How can we solve user accessibility issues? Only Javascirpt file, It should be attached in MediaWiki. We have accomplished converter development in javascript. We are going to test unit testing in Myanmar Orthography List. So, you may clear that why we are taking care on non-Unicode Fonts. We had solution to convert those thing.
This sounds simple enough. The javascript already exists, right? And it works? And it will allow people with older browsers to use Wikipedia today, while also providing a sensible path forward for the future?
That sounds wonderful! How can we make that happen on my.wikipedia.org?
--Jimbo
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 11:46 PM, Ngwe Tun ngwestar@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jimbo,
Yes, you may see link in my previous post. I don't want to involve any discussion. I'm keep trying to make merging media wiki and conversion java script. I've shown to some developer in wikimania 2008. I will finished up in my side first.
I hope to host @ sourceforge first and put it in media wiki as add-ons.
I'm esure that we do not need to argue so much in this discussion. We need to work for Myanmar People. And Please allow me to test our development in myanmarwikipedia.org. It would be our Burmese MediaWiki play ground. After successfully engaged in that web site, I will send those code to media wiki developer.
OK. You have been kicked out from myanmarwikipedia.org. No more testing.
Okisan
Best
Ngwe Tun. On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Ngwe Tun wrote:
How can we solve user accessibility issues? Only Javascirpt file, It should be attached in MediaWiki. We have accomplished converter development in javascript. We are going to test unit testing in Myanmar Orthography List. So, you may clear that why we are taking care on non-Unicode Fonts. We had solution to convert those thing.
This sounds simple enough. The javascript already exists, right? And it works? And it will allow people with older browsers to use Wikipedia today, while also providing a sensible path forward for the future?
That sounds wonderful! How can we make that happen on my.wikipedia.org?
--Jimbo
-- In Burmese; Ngwe mean 1) Silver 2) Money 3) Second Awards; Tun mean 1) Light 2) be prominent.
Wikimy-l mailing list Wikimy-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimy-l
At 09:23 +0900 2008-07-27, Kyaw Tun wrote:
OK. You have been kicked out from http://myanmarwikipedia.org/myanmarwikipedia.org. No more testing.
Well, this is troubling. And so is this http://www.myanmarwikipedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Myanmar_Wikipedia:Site_... where it appears that the owners of that version are trying to use the Wikipedia's name to make some money. There's even a PayPal link.
And yet Okisan has attacked me and Htoo Myint Naung on public forums, alleging that we are trying to use my.wikipedia.org to make money from users. Isn't that strange? And the reason he did it? Because of the content of a newspaper article.
Ngwe Tun wrote:
Hi Jimbo,
Hi!
And Please allow me to test our development in myanmarwikipedia.org http://myanmarwikipedia.org. It would be our Burmese MediaWiki play ground. After successfully engaged in that web site, I will send those code to media wiki developer.
We can set up a test wiki for you very quickly I am sure. I would like to request that you not use the myanmarwikipedia.org domain name until we are sure that it is not a problem.
We are here to provide you with the resources you need.
--Jimbo