cookfire cookfire@softhome.net wrote:
An entry will have the 'real content' available in many languages at the same time. It will be presented to you in the language of the interface that you used if available in that language. There will also be icons to show in what other languages this etymology or comment is available as well.
That sounds like it will be a *very* crowded interface before too long.
And a button to translate it to a new language that wasn't available yet. Nothing gets provincialized.
The provincialization remains in the fact that most people don't understand several languages. So, apparently a person can see that a definition is given in French and Hebrew... but.. * Do they know whether the Hebrew definition is a translation of the French definition, vice versa, or written independently? * Do they have any way of knowing whether the French definition has any more or less information than the Hebrew one? * Do they know whether they are perhaps for different senses of the same word? (Did the person who added the definition in Hebrew know enough French to mark it as a translation of a French one?)
All the translations of the content will be found in the sameplace, instead of having to hunt across all the different languageWiktionaries.
Interwiki links do that already, and are flexible enough to handle information that isn't just a translation of prior information.
It's not just about translations. Although, they too, will benefitof only having to be put in once and become available for each andevery person using the Wiktionary.
This, frankly, seems impossible, except for words with very specific semantics. I would like to see how this is supposed to be done.
I'm going to try and make an example of a common word and what it might look like in UW.
Bank seems like a good candidate to do this with.
Or maybe [[You]]. :p
*Muke!