Hello Louis, Ryan, Ian, Daniel, all, On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 12:38 -0800, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: > Hello Ryan, > > Thanks for the proposal. > > >Native-Lang project: English > >Project code: en > >Project level: Level II > >Project lead: Ryan Singer > >Project co-lead: Ian Lynch > > > >This is a proposal to start an English Native-Lang Project. This NL > >project is intended to cover all variations of English. That is, it is > >not specific to either US or British English, or any other variant. > > Okay... I have some questions below.
This is a very good and much-awaited move. > > > > > > >An English NL project would also help lower the disparity between > >projects. Right now the OOo project is roughly divided into "English" > >and "everyone else". An English NL project is a first step towards, > >eventually, having all languages on the same level, with English as a > >modular part of the whole, like every other language. Ryan, another very important part of any native-lang project is the users support in their native-langage. The EN project should be committed to this task too. > > Put another way, you seem to say in the first breath that English has a > privileged spot, and it does. Development ideas are discussed in > English, and many marketing ideas are also discussed in English. But > those discussions are in English so that all understand. If we all spoke > French as a second language, they'd be in French. An EN project, > however, would have discussions only in English and focus for marketing > on those regions where English is the native language. (But even in > this, it could get interesting, as the general popularity of English > blurs the distinction between "native" and "official".) > > In the second breath, it seems as if anglophone work suffers because it > lacks the committed focus or is doing too much (not sure which obtains > here). > > I think having an EN project could work. But my concern is simply this: > That the existing functional dominance of English would be strengthened > by an NLC for English, unless it were clear that: > > * MP represents the entire project, all languages. > > * Other global projects, though they have discussions in English, also > represent the entire project, eg, Documentation, tech projects, etc. > > * As work is already being done in English for Documentation, presumably > the focus of this EN project would be what, regarding Documentation, at > least? Would the EN project organize anglophone documentation writers? > > * EN (NLC EN) marketing efforts execute MP directives while also > allowing the creation of local endeavors, such as FR has. > > In short, these provisions seek to make clear that NLC EN is not > privileged and that though discussions in the global projects are in > English they are not ipso facto part of any EN project. I agree with all the provisions described by Louis; I would add the following concerning the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list; it should not (and isn't) an EN NL list. It's just the central users support list. even though, I believe we should go forward. +1 for the EN native-lang project!!!! Regards, Charles-H. Schulz. > > > > Best > Louis > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
