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.
If you believe otherwise, then where's your proposal to integrate all language Wikipedias using these recent advances in MT?
I may be a member of teh UNDL foundation, but even such dream systems as UNL only claim to be accurate 99% of the time (and so far, UNL has its fair share of problems), and even when they are accurate the things they produce often sound unnatural or awkward.
Mark
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 15:10:33 -0500, Stirling Newberry stirling.newberry@xigenics.net wrote:
On Dec 26, 2004, at 2:47 PM, Mark Williamson wrote:
As I said before, tagging of terms is one thing, but when you get to changing around grammar and word order, that is full-fledged machine translation and it won't work, no matter how many times you attack me personally.
Mark
You made your credibility an issue, and therefore my questioning of your credibility is appropriate. As for "machine translation" being unworkable - you should really catch up with the developments in the field of machine translation.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l