Hi all,
I have a question: why do we have separate Wikipedias for Malay and Indonesian?
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differences_between_Malay_and_Indonesian
, "The differences between Malay (Bahasa Melayu) and Indonesian
(Bahasa Indonesia) are comparable to the those between British English
and American English."
If this is the case, then why does our policy on English differ so
sharply than our policy with Malay/Indonesian?
Don't people realise that we're dividing labour? If they had
col-laborated on a single Wikipedia from the very beginning, the
Malay/Indonesian Wikipedia would probably have at least 15k articles
by now.
Mark
--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE
Scríobh Mark Williamson:
>A representation of what a proper implementation of Mongolian script
>protocols on mn.wiki should look like can be found here:
>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Mongolian_wikipedia_prev
iew.png
>(it's pretty neat, actually)
Is there any particular reason that the Wikipedia logo is flipped here? I
can understand the rest of it, but I don't see why the graphics on the page
should be shifted away from normal.
- Craig
-------------------
Craig Franklin
PO Box 764
Ashgrove, Q, 4060
Australia
http://www.halo-17.net - Australia's Favourite Source of Indie Music, Art,
and Culture.
Scríobh Mark Williamson:
>I would discourage this. Unless you really don't have an opinion, why
>not vote for your preferred candidates? If you don't have a preference
>and you don't like any of them, I can understand.
But I do have an opinion. The positions of all the candidates seem to be
essentially identical, "we love Wikipedia and NPOV". I see no dramatic
proposals on the topics of copyright, promotion, hardware or managing
growth. The candidates all propose to increase community input to the
board, but don't say exactly how they will do this. They all talk about
guiding the board, but offer no suggestions as to what direction they will
guide it in. Nobody, in particular, has expressed an opinion on the Chinese
Wikinews issue.
In summary, I voted blank.
Sláinte,
- Craig
-------------------
Craig Franklin
PO Box 764
Ashgrove, Q, 4060
Australia
http://www.halo-17.net - Australia's Favourite Source of Indie Music, Art,
and Culture.
Hi all
As you may or may not already know, Mongolian is one of the few
languages in the world that is written vertically _all_ the time
(Japanese, Chinese, and a few others can be written vertically, but
they can also be written horizontally).
Although Outer Mongolia (ie, the independent nation, as opposed the
Inner Mongolia which is currently administered by the People's
Republic of China) switched decades ago to the Cyrillic script for
Mongolian (due to pressure from their favourite ally and neighbour,
the USSR), since 1994 great efforts have been made to reintroduce the
Mongolian script. Many Outer Mongolians can read it, and it's being
taught in schools now.
Inner Mongolia never switched scripts: it has used Mongolian script
continuously now since its emergence.
Now, the issue here isn't which script to use as that can be worked
out later. The issue here is how we would organise a vertical website.
W3C standards spell out how to make vertical text properly using HTML.
However, this isn't supported by all browsers (Firefox, for one,
doesn't support it).
Also, since the user interface is designed for languages that are
written horizontally, it may be difficult to adapt to Mongolian. The
typical solution is to flip EVERYTHING 90 degrees counterclockwise.
A representation of what a proper implementation of Mongolian script
protocols on mn.wiki should look like can be found here:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Mongolian_wikipedia_prev…
(it's pretty neat, actually)
Mark
--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE
