[Foundation-l] language proposal policy. let's continue the work

Mark Williamson node.ue at gmail.com
Sat Jul 19 09:04:19 UTC 2008

> Why, if I don't agree with the baselines, would I help you refining them?
> My objections:
> * I _still_ am not convinced that translating the interface should be
> necessary for a project to go on

I agree.

> * It seems that criteriums 2 (ISO 639) and 3 (no language variations)
> would better be combined - ISO 639 codes are in general not given to
> language variants, so having it as a separate requirement seems
> overkill.

That makes sense.

> As for refining the points: At point 4 I would like to add that the
> audience should not only be people who are able to use that language,
> but also people who would want to use it - as an example, millions of
> people would be able to read an "English written backward" Wikipedia,
> but none or almost none would prefer it to the existing English one
> (of course English written backward falls short of criteriums 2 and 3)

Well, there are plenty of languages that people don't prefer to read,
but they might understand them better or get more out of them in some
ways. How many people, for example, do you think "prefer" Sicilian to
Italian? That doesn't mean a Sicilian Wikipedia isn't useful.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list