Hoi,
At this time, we made big progress by having a policy in place whereby
ISO-639-3 defined languages can gain eligibility from the WMF language
committee. Eligibility to allow the addition of labels in Wikidata without
any requirement for localisation as is per the policy for any other
project. At the same time we have a situation where it is technically
possible to have languages enabled for Wikidata only.
The plan is to ask to enable all eligible languages that have an Incubator
presence for Wikidata first. What needs doing is for someone to make a list
of the languages involved. Obviously, we want to see what impact it has.
Combined with the Reasonator, it has a great potential as it does provide
fall back languages that can be configured.
When new languages are requested, it will be ISO-639-3 only as per the
policy. Good arguments will need to be provided because we will not engage
in Wikidata as a "post stamp collection" of any and all languages/
Consequently, the involvement of native speakers will be an important plus.
If this feels like me "throwing cold water" on the enthusiasm for many more
languages then do understand that Wikidata does not support Wiktionary yet.
When lexical values become possible it is soon enough to revisit things
again.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 6 May 2014 20:55, P. Blissenbach <pu...@web.de> wrote:
> Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,Purodha what you say about Ethnologue is very biases,
> > wrong and often hardly relevant.
>
> I am sorry if my contribution was biased. My main goal was to
> warn that there are more than 7000-odd languages, extending
> ISO 639-3 is time consuming, and that we have the BCP47 defining
> language variants in addition to ISO 639.
>
> > When you know your history,
> > Ethnologue was asked if they would bring in their expertise
> > and system in the ISO processes because the existing ISO-639-2
> > was extremely inadequate. When it was included, it became
> > part of an established process whereby experts from national
> > standard bodies decide on the further development. Effectively
> > the role of Ethnologue is one of administrator, not initiator.
>
> Thrue.
>
> > Saying that all the issues about languages is because to Ethnlogue
> > is completely false.
>
> I was not meaning to say that.
>
> > The notion if there are many more languages is
> > very much open to debate. There is no good answer.
>
> Sure, it depends. Also, I do not want to put blame on anyone.
> Naturally, whatever you collect, you start somewhere, it will take time,
> and at some point you have an incomplete, but growing list. That is how
> I see Ethnologue. I keep mailing them data knowing that they are going
> to need their time to verify and process it.
>
> Taking into account what we likely have to use as a definition for
> "language" is, whether or not labels, lexemes, or similar, are spelled
> pronunced, signalled, or syntactically/grammatically put together
> differently
> enough to warrant that we call them distinct from another "language".
> I am well aware that this is a foggy thing and there are many instances
> that can cause controversies.
>
> > When you are interested in looking beyond the ISO-639-3 consider
> > the ISO-639-6. It aims to include any and all language variants
> > and it is not that interested in using the political term what
> > language has become.
>
> I was considering to mention it in my post. I did not, mainly for bevity.
>
> Yet also, I doubt, it's in a useful state already. Last fall or late
> summer,
> it had almost twice as many entries as ISO 639-3, language coverage in my
> main field was as incomplete as ISO 639, it was not publicized in a well
> usable way (Website down since long. Before that, queryable in a
> complicated and inefficient manner for individual entries and small
> sets only. No listings available online. No details beyond language
> names. Good news: the web site is partly online again as of today.)
>
> Yes, I do consider ISO 639-6. I am happy about it's clearer and
> simpler approach to the subject matter, and I am looking forward to using
> it, as its coverage grows.
>
> Purodha
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata-l mailing list
> Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
