(Mark, thanks for forwarding mail on general Wikitech, because I am not subscribed to the list where Zhengzhu sent the mail.)

On 4/15/05, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:

Also, as far as I know, there is only one Latin <> Cyrillic, so you don't need the 4 different varieties.

If you are talking about variants of articles: Ekavian/Iyekavian problem is very simple and it needs only contributors' work and not so complicated parsing. There would be one text in database (for ekavian/iyekavian variants); anyone would be able to choose to see ekavian or iyekavian and anyone would be able to choose ekavian or iyekavian in preferences. (Mark, please, look at previous discussion inside of this thread.) Also, you can see some differences at the page now. (I am not iyekavian and for sure, I missed something.)

If you are talking about variants inside of syntax, you are right. There is only need for ekavian/iyekavian manual transliteration, so there is no need for ((sr-ec::...\sr-el::...\ etc.)). We need only two variants: left should be ekavian, right should be iyekavian. So, in general, we need only ((<ekavian>\<iyekavian)). Left variant should be sr-ec and sr-el; right variant should be sr-jc and sr-jl. And it should be transliterated according to Cyrillic <-> Latin rules.

Another potential problem is an all-caps environment: a Cyrillic letter which becomes a Latin digraph, if in a word of all caps, will still be Caps-lowercase instead of Caps-caps as it should be.

It is correct transliteration. Caps should be solved inside of headings (i.e. markup language), not inside of transliteration. For example, capital (Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian) letters are Lj, Nj and Dž; not LJ, NJ and DŽ. Of course, capital letters should be

On 15/04/05, zhengzhu zhengzhu@gmail.com wrote:

I have put up a test site for the Serbian language that supports Cyrillics and Latin alphabets: http://s87257573.onlinehome.us/sr/

Just for the fun of it, I also made a English version, running at http://s87257573.onlinehome.us/en/

First, I'll tell it to Serbian community and you will have some comments from them about that very soon.

There is no need to have "sr" and "sr-ec" both; i.e., there is no need for "sr", because "sr" should be "sr-ec".

And, I think, that order of alphabets/dialects should be: sr-ec, sr-jc, sr-el, sr-jl (if it is complicated to implement, forget it).

Also, user should be back to variant which (s)he changed, not to general page (if it is possible, of course).

Kaixo!

On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 12:36:03AM -0400, zhengzhu wrote:

...

there is no need for ((sr-ec::...\sr-el::...\ etc.)). We need only

Why a markup syntax different of the one in zh: ? It would be more intuitive to use the same markup for that functionality on all wikipedias with multiscript conversions.

Also, there is a need to be able to specify the script; for example the alphabetic table, alphabetic ordering is different in latin and cyrillic, so it is needed to be able to do -{sr-Latn: ...... ; sr-Cyrl: .....}-

I tried a lot of possible syntax ant they all failed, the functionality has been removed? (despite being described in the main page)?

--

Ki ça vos våye bén, Pablo Saratxaga

http://chanae.walon.org/pablo/ PGP Key available, key ID: 0xD9B85466 [you can write me in Walloon, Spanish, French, English, Catalan or Esperanto] [min povas skribi en valona, esperanta, angla aux latinidaj lingvoj]

On 4/15/05, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:

Also, as far as I know, there is only one Latin <> Cyrillic, so you don't need the 4 different varieties.

Finally, I saw what did you talk about :) You are right about conversion. There is only need for Cyrillic <-> Latin transliteration. Ekavian/Iyekavian should be solved according to syntax ((\)).