[Foundation-l] Language proposal policy - Ausbausprache - Abstandsprache - Dachsprache

[Mark Williamson]

This is a good point, and it is a difficult decision. Sometimes, I
think, the standards bodies make the wrong decision. On the other
hand, it is fairly arbitrary, so I don't think we could necessarily do
a "better" job on our own. Perhaps in close cases, it is better to ask
several experts in particular languages. I know that for much of the
Ethnologue, experts were not directly consulted. That is why
amendments are still made to ISO 639-3 - it isn't perfect.

Mark

2008/9/18 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
> Hoi,
> My point is that we should not decide for ourself what a language is. We
> should leave that to others and to the standard body that is about this.
> That does not mean that we are not interested in the process. It does not
> mean that we should not be interested in how this issue can be approached,
> but it does mean that *we *should not be the judge of what is a language.
> Thanks.
>          GerardM
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 8:56 PM, Crazy Lover <always_yours.forever at yahoo.com
>> wrote:
>
>> It is inevitable we have to use scientific tools, one of them is the
>> Ausbausprache - Abstandsprache - Dachsprache criterion.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ausbausprache_-_Abstandsprache_-_Dachsprache
>>
>> GerardM you critized the subjectivity of the clause "Sufficiently unique",
>> Why do not add scientifical criteria in the community draft?
>>
>> C.m.l.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>