Agreed, sounds like a reasonable request, and the points about ISO's terminology are of course sound.
ons. 5. feb. 2025, 14:09 skrev Tochi Precious <[email protected]>: > The agency that assigns ISO codes already has a standardized terminology, > which is '*constructed language.'. *I suggest going with what already > exists to avoid miscommunication in the future. > > --- > Tochi Precious > *Wikipedian in Residence at Moleskine Foundation* > *German/English, Igbo/English, French/English Translator| Editor|* > *Alumnus, Cherie Blair Foundation Mentorship Program* > *Zimba Women Mentor, Uganda* > *Ambassador, The Next Economy Nigeria* > > *Alles ist möglich* > > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 4:34 PM MF-Warburg <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Language_proposal_policy as user >> suggested to use the term "constructed language" rather than "artificial >> language" in the policy. Seems decent enough to me. Any other thoughts? >> _______________________________________________ >> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
