On 13-Oct-10 07:58, Milos Rancic wrote:
but it would have been likely that we would have
it in the future, if Transnitrian Moldovans would have adopt Internet
in significant numbers
Why not create the new subdomain ro-cyrl.wikipedia.org at that point in
time? Nobody says the current content
On 13 October 2010 11:19, Gutza gu...@moongate.ro wrote:
Nobody says the current content should be deleted -- just stop
serving it.
Here you are playing with language, not advancing the discussion. By
delete, the thread starter meant precisely stop serving it.
- d.
On 13-Oct-10 13:32, David Gerard wrote:
On 13 October 2010 11:19, Gutza gu...@moongate.ro wrote:
Nobody says the current content should be deleted -- just stop
serving it.
Here you are playing with language, not advancing the discussion. By
delete, the thread starter meant precisely stop
An'n 13.10.2010 03:29, hett Gerard Meijssen schreven:
It has been suggested that a solution should be able to pass muster at the
language committee. I am seriously in favour of an end to this extravaganza.
However, I have not seen a proposal that would pass muster of the members of
the
Hoi,
The language committee does not involve itself normally. In this thread it
was suggested that it could by exception.
What I have done is apply the normal arguments we use for new languages. The
history of a language is of no relevance. What is relevant is that we have
one series of projects
In light of all the arguments, political and otherwise, discussed here,
I propose the following:
* Redirect mo.wiki to ro.wiki; I think this is undisputed, per the
LoC recognition that Moldovan is deprecated;
* Store the mo.wiki content, in whatever state it may be, for later use;
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 15:36, Gutza gu...@moongate.ro wrote:
* Apart from Mark, nobody actually said they wanted to /read/, never
mind write Romanian content in Cyrillic; the gadget I propose for
ro.wiki would be more of a gesture of courtesy than any real help
to anyone,
On 13-Oct-10 17:40, Milos Rancic wrote:
I think the community at ro.wiki wouldn't mind that.
Are you saying that ro.wp community would agree with transliteration
engine between Romanian Latin and Moldovan Cyrillic orthographies?
I'm saying that I *think* the ro.wp wouldn't mind a *gadget*,
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 16:49, Gutza gu...@moongate.ro wrote:
On 13-Oct-10 17:40, Milos Rancic wrote:
I think the community at ro.wiki wouldn't mind that.
Are you saying that ro.wp community would agree with transliteration
engine between Romanian Latin and Moldovan Cyrillic orthographies?
Milos,
I'm not proposing turning ro.wiki to ro-latin-and-cyrl.wiki. I'm
proposing a gadget that would seamlessly transliterate to Cyrillic *and
back to Latin again, if possible* -- that way everybody reads in their
own script, and (if possible) writes in their own script, while the
database
An'n 13.10.2010 16:49, hett Gutza schreven:
On 13-Oct-10 17:40, Milos Rancic wrote:
I think the community at ro.wiki wouldn't mind that.
Are you saying that ro.wp community would agree with transliteration
engine between Romanian Latin and Moldovan Cyrillic orthographies?
I'm saying that
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 17:10, Gutza gu...@moongate.ro wrote:
I'm not proposing turning ro.wiki to ro-latin-and-cyrl.wiki. I'm
proposing a gadget that would seamlessly transliterate to Cyrillic *and
back to Latin again, if possible* -- that way everybody reads in their
own script, and (if
On 13-Oct-10 18:25, Milos Rancic wrote:
That sounds reasonably to me. I have to check what do other LangCom
members think about it.
What is it exactly that sounds reasonable to you? I haven't the faintest
idea what you're talking about. I don't know how the Chinese/Serbian
engine works --
An'n 13.10.2010 17:31, hett Gutza schreven:
On 13-Oct-10 18:25, Milos Rancic wrote:
That sounds reasonably to me. I have to check what do other LangCom
members think about it.
What is it exactly that sounds reasonable to you? I haven't the faintest
idea what you're talking about. I don't
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 17:31, Gutza gu...@moongate.ro wrote:
On 13-Oct-10 18:25, Milos Rancic wrote:
That sounds reasonably to me. I have to check what do other LangCom
members think about it.
What is it exactly that sounds reasonable to you? I haven't the faintest
idea what you're talking
On 13-Oct-10 18:52, Milos Rancic wrote:
There are also some rewrite rules. For example, the default (based on
amount of texts written in Cyrillic; however, script-neutral) of
Serbian Wikipedia is Cyrillic. If you go to http://sr.wikipedia.org/
-- you will find the page in Cyrillic. However,
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 17:59, Gutza gu...@moongate.ro wrote:
On 13-Oct-10 18:52, Milos Rancic wrote:
There are also some rewrite rules. For example, the default (based on
amount of texts written in Cyrillic; however, script-neutral) of
Serbian Wikipedia is Cyrillic. If you go to
Greetings all,
The next IRC Office Hours will be with Barry Newstead, Chief Global
Development Officer (CGDO) of the Wikimedia Foundation, on Friday
October 15th, 17:00 UTC. As usual, this chat will be informal and in an
open format. You can learn more about past Office Hours and how to
I created a small test script at
http://nds.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruker:Slomox/vector2.js. Works well to
Cyrillize nds.wp ;-) (or any other wiki). It only supports reading so
far, editing will be harder. The problem will be cases like a Romanian
article written in Latin script and containing
Hi all,
I know Steven just sent out a note for Barry's Friday office hours
but this is in addition.Sorry for the late notice and for sending
them out of order.
Sue Gardner, the Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation,
will be having office hours this Thursday (Tomorrow) at 17:00 UTC
Hoi,
What reason would there be that is consistent with the aims of the Wikimedia
Foundation. What reason could be given that explicitly does not negate your
wish for the deletion of the mo.wikipedia?
You can not have it both ways imho.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 13 October 2010 17:59, Gutza
Hello,
While reading the FAQ of Creative Commons about the new Public Domain
Mark, I wondered what are the consequences for our projects. Will I
use PDM in future anyhow on Commons, for example?
Kind regards
Ziko
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/PDM_FAQ
--
Ziko van Dijk
Niederlande
Ziko van Dijk, 13/10/2010 21:35:
While reading the FAQ of Creative Commons about the new Public Domain
Mark, I wondered what are the consequences for our projects. Will I
use PDM in future anyhow on Commons, for example?
We should use CC0 instead of PD-Self.
The PDM in itself doesn't mean
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Ziko van Dijk zvand...@googlemail.comwrote:
While reading the FAQ of Creative Commons about the new Public Domain
Mark, I wondered what are the consequences for our projects. Will I
use PDM in future anyhow on Commons, for example?
Hopefully the main
On 13 October 2010 21:02, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
Ziko van Dijk, 13/10/2010 21:35:
While reading the FAQ of Creative Commons about the new Public Domain
Mark, I wondered what are the consequences for our projects. Will I
use PDM in future anyhow on Commons, for example?
geni, 13/10/2010 23:14:
On 13 October 2010 21:02, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Ziko van Dijk, 13/10/2010 21:35:
While reading the FAQ of Creative Commons about the new Public Domain
Mark, I wondered what are the consequences for our projects. Will I
use PDM in future anyhow on Commons, for
I for one am very keen to see us use this system, if for no other reason
than it leverages the existing visibility of the Creative Commons
machine-readable licensing structure. The CC-Public Domain Mark is not
actually doing anything new/different to the concept of the public domain
and doesn't
Liam Wyatt, 13/10/2010 23:43:
From what I hear (I'm here at the Europeana conference now where they are
officially launching the PDM tomorrow - as per the press release
http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/23755 ) CC were debating
whether to use a logo that was
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:
I for one am very keen to see us use this system, if for no other reason
than it leverages the existing visibility of the Creative Commons
machine-readable licensing structure. The CC-Public Domain Mark is not
actually
29 matches
Mail list logo
