I said, USING SIMPLE: for Simple English is Anglocentric.
Simple: might as well be a Wikipedia in Simplified Chinese. It's NOT
an ISO code, and it sure doesn't tell you it's in simple ENGLISH. It
should be en-simple: or simple-en:
Mark
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 22:42:11 +0000, Tomer Chachamu <the.r3m0t(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 15:28:31 -0700, Mark Williamson
<node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I, for one, believe we should merge simple: with
en:, but instead of
having two articles for each topic, we merge them completely so there
is just one en: instead of two.
Using simple: for Simple English is very Anglocentric, and on top of
that one could use a site like PopJisyo (
http://www.popjisyo.com/ )
to explain the more difficult words.
I don't think a lot of people will agree with me here and I don't
expect a merger will happen in the near future, but that's still my
opinion.
Anglocentric? How? English is a very commonly spoken language. Would
you appreciate a rename of the project? "Foreign English"?
A "merge" of en: and simple: wouldn't be a merge. Everything in
simple: would be discarded and en: would stay as it is.