Hello Daniel, all,
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Jonathon Blake wrote:
For English, regional groups make slightly more sense than one NLP ---
if only because regional groups could handle translation into English
better.
I don't think so... you don't seem similar distinctions between all the variations of Spanish. And the differences I see between Spanish spoken in different countries is greater than that between Brits and Yanks.
Another important issue to consider is not dividing our volunteers too much. There is an optimum region. Having too many people in a group is incredibly inefficient (I believe that some OOo lists suffer from this). But having too few is also ineffective.
And yet a third issue is that NLs are not intended to correspond to countries, but rather to linguistic groups. I *like* that, and wouldn't want to lose it. I would not feel confortable on an "American NL" or an "British NL". That just rubs the the wrong way. But I would be right at home at an "English NL".
+1. In the mean time, one of the missions of an English NL would be to provide localized builds for, say, US_EN, UK_EN, AU_EN, etc....
Yes. And never forget that the NLC and the Marketing project don't compete against each other, they work together.
A north_american_regional_group would, by default, have to include, at
a minimum, Spanish, and French. [French being an official language of
Canada. Spanish being an official language in two states and the
dominant language in five states of the united states.
Indeed, you're right. Yet another problem with country/region groups (that's a fourth point).
And a fifth point: Marketing already has MarCons that are divided based on regional boundaries.
Charles.
Cheers,
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
