I did not talk about our (e-mail) conversation - I talked about a discussion page on wiktionary where from one to the other day I found the note that for definitions Sass ortography has to be used and that without common consensus knowing that there were at least two people who defend all possibilities of writing. http://nds.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Sprache_der_Beitr%C3%A4ge Here Sass is called "Norm" a norm is a "standard", but Sass is no standard, but one way of more possible writings.
The discussion we had privately has nothing to do with that and I'd never take any private discussion to public.
Sorry, I now have to care about wikimania and translations :-)
Ciao, Sabine
Heiko Evermann wrote:
Hi Sabine, hi everyone,
But let's talk about minor languages. We have some difficulties on the nds wiktionary - people think that the only way to write correct is following the Sass ortography. Some days ago I had a longer telephone conversation with one of the directors of the Institut für niederdeutsche Sprache (institute for nds) - he explained that there are at least six different acknowledged ways of writing nds and if we go to details 200 to 400 ways of writing (including also dictionaries from around 1920 etc.) can be defined - so accepting only one way of writing is a discrimination to my opinion. They all need to be accepted - the important thing is that there is a distinction from one to the other. How we could achieve this - in the actual wiktionary signing all non classified words just with nds. Words that can be classified receive nds-ABC, nds-DEF, nds-SASS, nds-xyz. So not only the single term is to be classified, but also the definition (if possible) - if it is not classified there's simply no reference to a certain class.
This is not a correct representation of the discussion that we had.
___________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB http://mail.yahoo.it