[Foundation-l] Re: new language policy

Tue Nov 22 17:41:59 UTC 2005

Sabine Cretella wrote:

>>> Objective criteria can be established for this.
>>>
>>>    1. A key set of interface pages must have been written in or 
>>> translated into the language,
>>>    2. There must be a minimum number of articles exceeding a 
>>> specified length written in the main namespace of the project, and
>>>    3. There must be a minimum number of contributors, EACH of whom 
>>> has written a minimum number of qualifying articles in the main 
>>> namespace.
>>>
>>> Perhaps there could be others too.
>>>
>>> Ec
>>
>> Nod. I think these are good criteria;
>> But I presume interface can only be translated really if there is a 
>> separate independant project, rather than a unique seedwiki ?
>
> Please consider that the interface is one of the most difficult parts 
> to do - with Neapolitan I have part of it online, part of it here and 
> we are still thinking on how to call certain things in Neapolitan - 
> because there are no "official terms" for many things - often people 
> use English, some Italian and some an Englis/Italian that has been 
> adapted to Neapolitan. I'd say the interface cannot be ready fast - it 
> takes quite a lot of time to decide, because this is one of these very 
> particular situations where thanks to Wikipedia neologisms are being 
> created. I very much listen to young people when they talk about 
> computers and internet to understand, but believe me: it is more than 
> just "translating some words".
>
> I'd leave a lot of time for the interface, but I would expect that 
> some basic articles can be written by anyone: descriptions of towns, 
> churches, museums etc.

I appreciate that difficulty, and would limit that requirement to 
certain *key* interfaces; what is "key" would need to be defined.  In 
the Neapolitan example it might be acceptable to keep the less important 
interfaces temporarily in Italian, but I'm sure that in an active 
project the members would consider that leaving it that way would be an 
embarassment.

The dominance of English in technical language can be a big problem for 
the guardians of major languages.  It could be almost impossible for 
minor languages that lack any significant educational establishment.  
This puts us in an awkward situation.  The descriptivist/prescriptionist 
divide is an ongoing concern for wiktionaries.  To be true to our 
principles we should only include words that are actually used, not in 
English, not in Italian, and certainly not in minor languages.  If we on 
the outside propose words for the Neapolitans then Neapolitan won't be 
Neapolitan anymore.

Ec