Jimmy Wales wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Not really, since the existing wiktionaries would continue as they have all along.
I am not agreeing or disagreeing or taking any position on this at all. Please consider my questions about this to be merely data gathering. :-)
Why should we have such a formal break? Why shouldn't we instead transition from one to the other in a seamless way? I worry a lot about duplication of effort, etc.
Are there objections from old-school wiktionarians to the ultimate wiktionary plans? Is it possible that we could address these objections through code?
I'm very sorry that I don't already know all of this, but I'm sure you can all get me up to speed quite quickly.
To a large extent I see the fundamental difference between Gerard and me as rooted in different visions about the role and nature of dictionaries. I'll try not to misrepresent his point of view.
I see Gerard's vision as being based in the need for technical solutions for machine translations. In theory with his method one should be able to look up a word in one's own language and immediately be able to find a corresponding term in whatever other language one desires. I at least agree with him that such an approach would require far more sophisticated software than what we now employ. Much of what he proposes appears to be very highly dependent on templates and technical codification rather that plain language editing, and I'm afraid that that would scare away many potential new contributors who don't feel comfortable with the more technical approach.
For my part translation is a secondary function of a dictionary. Documenting the history of a word, citing quotations that support uses of the word, and commentary on the usages of a word are more interesting and important. I recently did a little of this to raise awareness of the divergence of [[gourmand]] in English and French. I find our present software essentially adequate for the task.
Gerard has been talking about his Ultimate Wiktionary for a long time, but so far I have not seen examples of what Gerard's Wiktionary will look like, how it will work or how it will be editable. Perhaps if he presented more concrete examples attitudes could change.
I guess "old-school" is probably a good term. I have very little involvement on the technical side of things. I do find it a chore to insert a picture or a table, but I figure it out when I have to. When templates appear in an article that I am editing, I need to make extra effort just to track where some of them come from or what they mean. If I, as a person who has been here for over three years, am having trouble with this, it must be worse for a non-technical person who just wants to indulge his love of words.
Ec