Well, fair enough - LFN has an ISO 639-3 code and thus
is technically
eligible. However, how would it reasonably fulfill the criterion of native
speaker editors? I'm even more doubtful than what Amir and Anthony
expressed. I don't see how LFN can be sustainable enough to ever be allowed
to leave the incubator. Sorry for my obstinacy.
On 31-Jan-17 19:00, Michael Everson wrote:
Klingon has a ridiculously limited vocabulary.
LFN is as interesting and
useful as Esperanto, and has a large and preactical vocabulary. I favour
inclusiveness. It costs us little.
On 31 Jan 2017, at 17:48, Oliver Stegen <oliver_stegen(a)sil.org> wrote:
Please note that SIL accepted a change request (submitted by the
inventor of this language, cf.
http://www-01.sil.org/iso639-3
/cr_files/2007-144.pdf) but Ethnologue did not include lfn in their
editions ever.
So? That’s Ethnologue’s business.
Given that LFN has a wiki on Wikia (cf.
http://lfn.wikia.com/wiki/Paje
_xef), I don't see why we should accept it as
a Wikimedia project. Let
it go the way of Klingon ...
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org