Hoi, When we are to do this for English and have digitise and digitize, we have to keep in mind that this ONLY deals with issues that are differences between GB and US English. There are other varieties of English that may make this more complicated.
Given the size of the GB and US populations it would split the cache and effectively double the cache size. There are more languages where this would provide serious benefits. I can easily imagine that the German, Spanish and Portuguese community would be interested.. Then there are many of the "other" languages that may have an interest.. The first order of business is not can it be done but who will implement and maintain the language part of this. Thanks, GerardM
2009/9/12 Ilmari Karonen nospam@vyznev.net
Happy-melon wrote:
Ilmari Karonen wrote:
-{af: {{GFDL/af}}; als: {{GFDL/als}}; an: {{GFDL/an}}; ar: {{GFDL/ar}}; ast: {{GFDL/ast}}; be: {{GFDL/be}}; be-tarask: {{GFDL/be-tarask}}; <!-- ...and so on for about 70 more languages -->}-
The above begs the question, of course, would this switch actually work? And if it does, how does it affect the cache and linktables? More investigation needed, methinks....
Indeed, that was what I was wondering about too. Without actually trying it out, my guess would be that it would indeed work, but at a cost: it'd first parse all the 75 or so subtemplates and then throw all but one of them away.
Of course, that's what one would have to do anyway, to get full link table consistency.
It does seem to me that it might not be *that* inefficient, *if* the page were somehow cached in its pre-languageconverted state but after the expensive template parsing has been done. Does such a cache actually exist, or, if not, could one be added with reasonable ease?
-- Ilmari Karonen
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l