Well, fair enough - LFN has an ISO 639-3 code and thus is technically
eligible. However, how would it reasonably fulfill the criterion of
native speaker editors? I'm even more doubtful than what Amir and
Anthony expressed. I don't see how LFN can be sustainable enough to ever
be allowed to leave the incubator. Sorry for my obstinacy.
On 31-Jan-17 19:00, Michael Everson wrote:
Klingon has a ridiculously limited vocabulary. LFN is as interesting and useful
as Esperanto, and has a large and preactical vocabulary. I favour
inclusiveness. It costs us little.
On 31 Jan 2017, at 17:48, Oliver Stegen <[email protected]> wrote:
Please note that SIL accepted a change request (submitted by the inventor of
this language, cf. http://www-01.sil.org/iso639-3/cr_files/2007-144.pdf) but
Ethnologue did not include lfn in their editions ever.
So? That’s Ethnologue’s business.
Given that LFN has a wiki on Wikia (cf. http://lfn.wikia.com/wiki/Paje_xef), I
don't see why we should accept it as a Wikimedia project. Let it go the way of
Klingon ...
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
