kent.karlsson14 at telia.com
Tue Dec 1 00:37:38 CET 2015
Den 2015-11-30 23:34, skrev "Shawn Steele" <Shawn.Steele at microsoft.com>:
> That's too specific. The *ONLY* reason that this tag might be interesting is
> for interchange. (Otherwise they just go -x-pirate on it). And my users
> aren't going to set their language to en-US-wpsimple, but they *might* change
> to en-US-simple if they needed that extra assistance.
> We shouldn't be encoding one-off proprietary tags here. People can make their
> own private use tags if they want to talk to themselves (after all, that's
> what they're for).
And when Wikipedia finds that the current specific house rules, which are
for English only, are somewhat ill-conceived and replace them by some other
house rules (perhaps more generally applicable), then what? -wpsimpl2?
> If they tried -simple and discovered a need to distinguish simplea from
> simpleb, then I might be interested, but I don't see a case or scenario where
> that even begins to make sense. They're not asking for -wpsimple and -wphard
> and -wpmedium.
No, but others DO use several levels of "simple", for, e.g., (selected) news
> Note that this isn't like an OED standard that's used by multiple
> organizations in an open interchange-y way. At best it's used by vendors of a
> single organization (and then they could go with the private tags).
> How does -simple not solve Wikipedia's immediate problem of providing normal
> and simplified versions of English?
More information about the Ietf-languages