Again, your proposal is nothing short of machine translation because it includes using a machine to convert between different syntaxes, grammars, vocabularies, etc. Apparently you already realise this and think there's nothing wrong with that.
But the fact remains that machine translation is not as reliable as you say. If you have some sort of working model, then perhaps people will be willing to trust you, but I checked with some Wikipedians (both those I agree with most of the time and those I usually disagree with) and the general consensus is that in this proposal you're off your rocker.
Mark
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 16:00:49 -0500, Stirling Newberry stirling.newberry@xigenics.net wrote:
On Dec 26, 2004, at 3:53 PM, Mark Williamson wrote:
Machine translation is unworkable to the degree that it is still not reasonable to use it to provide multilingual content and expect it to be reasonably correct.
Nothing in your rant is reponsive to the proposal, and much of it is inaccurate, even given the strawman that it is attacking.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l