Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
@C933103 That said, unless if other langcom officially posted a "within-member" vote, and its result is indeed 2/3 agreetion under voting policy, it's still true that this is a simple "one-oppose veto" caseTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL
C933103 added a comment.
Well, as mentioned, the code cmg previously suggested as possible alternative is actually not appropriate according to email exchanges you have conducted with professors that know more about these terminology. And given the email exchange also confirmed that the current
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
So you still want this to be agreed by langcom, and you still wanna use mn-mong?TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: Liuxinyu970226Cc: Badaa, ChristianKl, C933103,
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
@C933103 Because he said me "shame".TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: Liuxinyu970226Cc: Badaa, ChristianKl, C933103, jhsoby, Lydia_Pintscher, GerardM, Aklapper,
Badaa added a comment.
In T137810#4644978, @Liuxinyu970226 wrote:
@Badaa So if you have questions other than "request to cancel a macrolanguage status" which is defined as no-go by SIL staffs, list them, then @GerardM will investigate them.
If your question only has that no-go, then let's
Popolon added a comment.
And then the list also have Kalmyk and Qaracin, however they don't even have their own ISO 639 language code from what I know
Khalmyk (or kalmyk) is Oirat (xal-myk), two names for the same culture/languageTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
@Badaa So if you have questions other than "request to cancel a macrolanguage status" which is defined as no-go by SIL staffs, list them, then @GerardM will investigate them.
If your question only has that no-go, then let's decline this, if you even can't trust
Badaa added a comment.
Thanks @C933103 .
The dialects and languages are different terms in ISO standard. In every language (whatever individual or macro) has multiple dialects. I think dialects are not relevant in this scope.
Buryat and Oirat people can also communicate with Mongolian script or
C933103 added a comment.
In T137810#4641351, @Popolon wrote:
Just a little tip, on firefox, go to about:config, then search for the browser.urlbar.decodeURLsOnCopy option and change it from false to true, this is essential for non pure-english characters (aka any accent or other char from any
C933103 added a comment.
@Popolon I believe Monguor and all that do not/no longer use Mongolian Script in writing so that's not really relevant to the context.
@Liuxinyu970226 what about Phagspa?
Also I would remind you that in ISO 639, the macrolanguage Mongolian only cover khk/mvf but not
Popolon added a comment.
Just a little tip, on firefox, go to about:config, then search for the browser.urlbar.decodeURLsOnCopy option and change it from false to true, this is essential for non pure-english characters (aka any accent or other char from any other language using latin script or
Badaa added a comment.
In T137810#4638007, @Liuxinyu970226 wrote:
@C933103
however there are only one Classical Mongolian Script just like there are only one Modern Standard Arabic.
Huh? Phags'pa ≠ Mongolian?
@Badaa
Actually, the big misconception is that there doesn't exist many Mongolian
Popolon added a comment.
I agree with you on the point that Phags'pa is only a writing of the Yuan dynasty, the official language is at this time Khalkh or it's classical Mongolian version.
The scripts are generally the same in Mongolian central dialects (if we don't think about frontier between
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
@C933103
however there are only one Classical Mongolian Script just like there are only one Modern Standard Arabic.
Huh? Phags'pa ≠ Mongolian?
@Badaa
Actually, the big misconception is that there doesn't exist many Mongolian languages but many scripts.
C933103 added a comment.
@Popolon According to my understanding assuming they are correct understanding, using Arabic as analogy, what you propose would be like making different monolingual value for "Libyan Modern Standard Arabic", "Egyptian Modern Standard Arabic", "Tunisian Modern Standard
Popolon added a comment.
So 2 years and 3 month later we are still at the same point ? Is it so hard to add several ISO639-3 mongolian codes for traditionnal mongolian script ?
The more imortant indiviual languages to add (to avoid conflict of macrolanguage as this is the main reason of the
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
@C933103 and @Badaa Such request is definitely not possible, have you two ever read that?TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: Liuxinyu970226Cc: Badaa, ChristianKl,
Badaa added a comment.
In T137810#4627253, @C933103 wrote:
Sorry for late reply,
@Liuxinyu970226 If the concern of ISO639's RA is "users of the codes understand that part 2 of the standard has a code that includes several coded languages in part 3.", then probably what can be done is ask for
C933103 added a comment.
@Liuxinyu970226 If the concern of ISO639's RA is "users of the codes understand that part 2 of the standard has a code that includes several coded languages in part 3.", then probably what can be done is ask for cancellation of the mvf code and khk code in the ISO639-3?
Badaa added a comment.
@Liuxinyu970226,
I read.
I didn't request to copy paste those comments.
I just tried to answer following questions of you but I had no idea.
Should I change the title and description to not directly mention mn-mong, but a list that includes this as just a candidate?
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
In T137810#4005278, @Badaa wrote:
Hi,
I have nothing to say... What should we or can we do now???
Have you read my this comment above? Or why do you want me to copy paste those comments more than once?
Because of the email copy above, I would say that the Apple
Badaa added a comment.
Hi,
I have nothing to say... What should we or can we do now???TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: BadaaCc: Badaa, ChristianKl, C933103, jhsoby, thiemowmde, Liuxinyu970226,
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
In T137810#3966715, @Liuxinyu970226 wrote:
Because of the email copy above, I would say that the Apple did such things wrong, the Google did wrong, the Microsoft did wrong, the Mozilla did wrong, the Nintendo did wrong, the Samsung did wrong, the Sony did wrong,
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
Because of the email copy above, I would say that the Apple did such things wrong, the Google did wrong, the Microsoft did wrong, the Mozilla did wrong, the Nintendo did wrong, the Samsung did wrong, the Sony did wrong, and most of Wikipedia contributors did wrong
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
@Badaa Unfortunatelly changing a Macrolanguage back to an Individual language on SIL (even you have reason that that is wrong), is simply impossible as per this email copy, where I asked staffs of SIL last week, and these are what I've got:
Dear Liu Xin Yu,
Thank
Badaa added a comment.
Hi,
Thanks Gerard M.
I just read the Terms and definitions of ISO 639-3.
There are following sentences in paragraph 4.2.2 Individual languages:
There is no one definition of “language” that is agreed upon by all and appropriate for all purposes. As a result,
there can be
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
The defenitions are in the standard. The standard is the ISO639-3.
Thanks,
GerardMTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: GerardMCc: Badaa, ChristianKl, C933103,
Badaa added a comment.
Hi,
I am from Mongolia.
What are the definitions of a macro language and a language?
If a language is a (mainly spoken) system to communicate among people then Mongolian is not macro language. Because, I can communicate without any problems with mongolian people in Inner
C933103 added a comment.
In T137810#3811581, @Liuxinyu970226 wrote:
In T137810#3771454, @C933103 wrote:
What is the rationale of macrolanguage being not usable to identify text?
If you could make a language conversion system between two writting system, Okay, otherwise my aganist to mn-Mong is
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
In T137810#3771454, @C933103 wrote:
What is the rationale of macrolanguage being not usable to identify text?
If you could make a language conversion system between two writting system, Okay, otherwise my aganisto mn-Mong is still valid.TASK
GerardM added a comment.
Because it is not one but multiple languages.TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: GerardMCc: ChristianKl, C933103, jhsoby, thiemowmde, Liuxinyu970226, Lydia_Pintscher,
C933103 added a comment.
What is the rationale of macrolanguage being not usable to identify text?TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: C933103Cc: ChristianKl, C933103, jhsoby, thiemowmde,
GerardM added a comment.
it is still a macro language and therefore not usable to identify a textTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: GerardMCc: ChristianKl, C933103, jhsoby, thiemowmde,
C933103 added a comment.
Then mon, mon is ISO 639-3TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: C933103Cc: ChristianKl, C933103, jhsoby, thiemowmde, Liuxinyu970226, Lydia_Pintscher, GerardM, Aklapper,
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
Not sure if this TWN thread is related or not: https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Thread:Support/Please_support_%22Traditional_Mongolian_Script%22, where I also made a comment that in favor of mvf and aganist mn-MongTASK
GerardM added a comment.
No mn-Mong is a combination of the language and the script. mn is a ISO-639-1 codeTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: GerardMCc: ChristianKl, C933103, jhsoby,
C933103 added a comment.
mvf only refer to Mongolian spoken in Central part of Inner Mongolia while mn-Mong is written by all mn users.TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: C933103Cc: ChristianKl,
ChristianKl added a comment.
I there a reason against creating the language as mvf with the name Peripheral Mongolian?TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: ChristianKlCc: ChristianKl, C933103,
C933103 added a comment.
btw would it be a good idea to apply for a literary mongolian code like literary chinese if the situation about literary mongolian is so similar to literary chinese? But it seems like it would at least take at least a year for the ISO 639 RA to make any change to iso
Popolon added a comment.
This is why for we need both cmg (where default is Mong), khk-Mong (where default today is Cyrl) and mvf (where default is Mong). If language can vary on cmg, there are some texts that are classified as cmg and is used (and needed as source) in Wikipedia.TASK
C933103 added a comment.
@GerardM but traditional mongolian script is like literary chinese, which is universal to every languages that were using it as their written form and thus it is invalid to say which language they belong to. Just like you can say Nihon Shoki is written in Chinese but you
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
You are wrong. We do not accept macro languages for new purposes. Only when
a code is already in use, we let it ride. Reluctantly. The point of this is
that we do not and do not want to end existing projects.
Thanks,
GerardMTASK
C933103 added a comment.
@GerardM
0. According to the "Requirements for a new language code" linked above, the WIP requirement for a new language code is a valid IETF tag not a valid ISO code
Macrolanguages in ISO 639-3 are still individual languages in ISO 639-2, and definition of
Popolon added a comment.
Mong is for uiyghur-mongolian script. Classical mongolian, use this script, not soyombo or Phags-pa. Phags-pa was only used about 1 century. -Mong is probably not needed for this.
Cyrillic is only used for buryat (in Republic of Buryatia), kalmyk (in Republic of
Liuxinyu970226 added a comment.
In T137810#2679427, @Popolon wrote:
Could you also add cmg (classical mongolian), that is classed as individual) by default it uses Mong script. and khk-Mong ?
http://www-01.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=cmg
Why? To include Phags-pa? Soyombo?TASK
Popolon added a comment.
Could you also add cmg (classical mongolian), that is classed as individual) by default it uses Mong script. and khk-Mong ?
http://www-01.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=cmgTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL
Popolon added a comment.
So could you add mvf-Mong instead of mn-Mong please ?TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: PopolonCc: jhsoby, thiemowmde, Liuxinyu970226, Lydia_Pintscher, GerardM,
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
We do not accept anything new that does not comply with the policy. There
is plenty of old stuff that does not change as per the policy.
Thanks,
GerardMTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL
Popolon added a comment.
After ethnologue, eng, is only for England English and some variants around the world, not US/canadian english, but still U.S. Virgin Islands and Jamaica in America.
https://www.ethnologue.com/language/eng
So what is the code for US English, that so much people view as
Popolon added a comment.
eng.wikipedia.org is for english, not for mongolian...
In the case of zh, this should be cmn (chinese mandarin, not zh). zh (that can means zhongwen, zhonghua, etc...) include all chineses languages, As in mongolian, there are several meaning, (languages of china (which
Popolon added a comment.
mn is used as language for standard mongolian in wikipedia (mn.wikipedia.org, tag in wikidata, so if it's not valide, this should be removed.
https://www.ethnologue.com/language/mvf for ethnologue, mvf, is only a geographical distinction, mvf is for china, mainly
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
Yes, and zh is a language not a macro language. It is about new
recognitions and mn is a macro language. When the language policy were in
effect from the beginning, it would have been eng.wikipedia.org.
Thanks,
GerardMTASK
Popolon added a comment.
About several writings for a language, in chinese, there is zh-Hani (hanzi in general), zh-Hant (traditionnal hanzi), zh-Hans (simplified hanzi) and the same thing for Gan Chinese (gan-Hant & gan-Hant).TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL
GerardM added a comment.
Please provide the source that backs you up. It has to be the ISO-639-3 as
it is what our policies is based on.
Thanks,
GerardMTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To:
Popolon added a comment.
mn doesn't referer to mongolian as a macrolanguage but as a language, khalkha is the recognized standard dialect of the mongolian language. other mongolian languages are buriat (bua) or oirat (xal).
As said before monglian term is both used in mongolian and chinese about
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
You are wasting your time searching for a result that is wrong on basic
principles. When a language is not a language why would you want it to be a
language ? Why seek in documents something that is self evident. Something
that is NOT a language should never be
Nikki added a comment.
First you said it was stated policy, now you're saying it's not stated anywhere. I'm clearly wasting my time trying to get a straight answer from you.TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
It is so obvious that is not even in the policy.
Thanks,
GerardMTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: GerardMCc: jhsoby, Nikki, thiemowmde, Liuxinyu970226,
Nikki added a comment.
Could you point me to the "stated policy" you mention? The only one I can find is https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_proposal_policy which is specifically about starting new projects and doesn't even say anything about macrolanguages.TASK
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
I am a member of the Language Committee of the Wikimedia Foundation. It is
stated policy that we do not accept macro languages. Lydia does read the
comments and she knows of its existence, its policies and for me it is not
personal. Is it for you?
Thanks,
GerardMTASK
Nikki added a comment.
The minimum requirements are quite clearly stated on the page I linked and mn-mong does meet them. If you feel so strongly about macrolanguage codes that you're not willing to accept that those are the criteria for the monolingual text datatype, then perhaps @Lydia_Pintscher
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
That makes no difference. A language needs to fulfill some minimum
requirements and mn is not the code for a language.
Thanks,
GerardMTASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137810EMAIL
Nikki added a comment.
This is a request for a new monolingual text language, not a request for a new project. The criteria for new monolingual text languages (described at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Monolingual_text_languages#Requirements_for_a_new_language_code by someone working for
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
Sorry but your only option is wrong on principles. The code mn is for a
language code that will never get recognition from the language committee.
The way to distinguish between scripts is by using the ISO-15934 code and
consequently it should be mn-Mong if your way
Nikki added a comment.
@thiemowmde:
The aim here, as I understand it, is to distinguish the two scripts, particularly because of the extra display support Mongolian script needs, not to distinguish the khk variety associated with Mongolia from the mvf variety associated with China. If that is
Popolon added a comment.
In my opinon, as a very beginner in mongolian language, every written words I seen in dictionaries (old one like Lessig or current one), seems to match with mvf one I seen on fr.wiktionary, wrote by a french in inner-Mongolia. (China), I learned with the pronunciation of
thiemowmde added a comment.
Ok, this is very much enlightening. Thank you very much. However, the questions I listed above still remain. Should we add it as a monolingual code to Wikibase, or favor khk and mvf? These are listed as known language codes in at least one extension (mvf only in Babel,
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
The practise of dropping upper case in the ISO-15934 is a MediaWiki
practice that is incorrect. In the grand scheme of things it is only a
minor matter.
Mong is the correct code for the Mongolian script. The reason why mn-mong
is not there is that it does not make
thiemowmde added a comment.
Wow, that's a lot of information. ;-) Thank you very much.
I did a search on our global code base:
MediaWiki does have support for many …-cyrl and …-latn locales.
There is never a country code attached. It's just "ku-latn", "kk-cyrl" and so on.
Note that everything I
GerardM added a comment.
Hoi,
mn is the code ISO-639 for the language, Mong is the CLDR code for the
script and CN is a code for the country where it is practices. The correct
LANGUAGE code is either khk or mvf because as a macro language that does
not have an existing project it is not eligible.
Popolon added a comment.
In language code, first part is language, second part is script (Mong|Han|Latn|Arab...) and the third the country, here CN (China), MN (Mongolia) The traditional Mongolian script is mainly used in Inner-Mongolia (China), but is since few year recognized again as
71 matches
Mail list logo
