kent.karlsson14 at telia.com
Fri Nov 27 00:31:47 CET 2015
Den 2015-11-26 23:04, skrev "Michael Everson" <everson at evertype.com>:
> On 26 Nov 2015, at 21:30, Kent Karlsson <kent.karlsson14 at telia.com> wrote:
>> Yes, but as Mark (and, I think, Shawn) say: this is of very marginal use,
>> and should be at very low priority, and could wait, perhaps indefinitely.
> To what end? This is a volunteer effort. What benefit is there in waiting?
Just that is does not appear particularly urgent.
>> With regard to wpsimple, I don't like it, since it is (more or less) for
>> Wikipedia only (and then only for one or a few languages); even though
>> Wikipedia is "a pretty darn'd high-volume site².
> The specific simple variety
> of English for which a subtag has been sought is precisely the one used on the
> Wikipedia, as defined there. en-wpsimple is well-defined by the Wikipedia.
Yes, but as I said: it is (more or less) for Wikipedia only (and then only
one or a few languages). It is basically useless for anyone else.
[Regarding the CEFR scheme]
>I think that ranking levels of simplicity is way outside the scope of
> our project.
In that case, "Ogden's Basic English" and 'wpsimple' would be "way outside
the scope of our project" as well.
> ISO 639 is codes for the representation of names of languages.
> Our subtags are too, just at a different level of granularity.
"<language X> 'subset' at level <n>"; e.g. 'es-levelB1' would be the tag
for "Spanish intended for readers/listeners at CEFR proficiency level B1".
That would be just as fine as "en-ogden" tag for "English according to
Ogden's Basic English", and the former would be *way* more useful,
and the scheme is useable for any language, amplifying the usefulness
of CEFR level variant subtags.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages