Hi Yann, Why, yes, we do have a linguist on the Ubiquity team. That would be me. :)
A lot of work and discussion has been going on in the Ubiquity internationalization arena, including the brand new parser framework (Parser 2) which will be released as part of the next Ubiquity release, 0.5. I've been blogging and thinking about many specific issues related to the localization of Ubiquity and you can find these here: http://mitcho.com/blog/tag/ubiquity/ In particular, my first post on the job may clarify some of the overall goals and direction of Ubiquity localization: http://mitcho.com/blog/projects/how-natural-should-a-natural-interface-be/ We also have an internationalization/localization mailing list which you're welcome to join if interested: http://groups.google.com/group/ubiquity-i18n mitcho > > > Are there linguistic specialists, in Ubiquity team ? I guess > internationalization will bring a lot of theoretical problems, and > working with linguists may help a lot modelization and therefore > implementation... > > But I have to say I don't really understand how would an > internationalized Ubiquity work. Does it mean you'd be able to type > either a chinese, french, or english command, and ubiquity would > detect which syntax analyzer is applicable ? And what if I want to use > a command developed by an english guy, and pipe it with a command > developed by a german one ? Are you plainly sure going for > internationalization first is the right choice ? Maybe, but AFAIK > you'll need strong linguistics knowledge to achieve this... > > Bye, > Yann > > > On 16 juin, 19:05, Jono DiCarlo <[email protected]> wrote: >> Here is a blog post I wrote August of last year about piping / >> command- >> chaining: >> >> http://jonoscript.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/plumbing-and-the-magic- >> wor... >> >> So as you can see, we've been thinking about this for a long time. >> (The blog post describes a preliminary piping feature that I snuck, >> undocumented, into Ubiquity 0.1, but unfortunately that feature has >> been broken since then by changes to the parser.) >> >> As Mitcho said, though, our first priority right now is >> internationalization, and natural-language pipes are going to be >> difficult to internationalize. So I think we're going to try to get >> the i18n work mostly done and then revisit the pipes idea and figure >> out how they will work in the grammars of the languages we support. >> >> I'm now working on a roadmap document for future Ubiquity releases. >> Pipes will feature prominently. When I'm done I'll post a link here. >> >> --Jono, Mozilla Labs >> >> On Jun 16, 8:25 am, bastiano <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> One time I could pipe Twitter status command with the Tiny url >>> command. I just wrote my message for Twitter, then I opened the Tiny >>> url having both together, message + the short url and I send it to >>> Twitter in one time. It was a bit difficult, I had to look for the >>> combination between both, but I got it. I haven't tried again. >> >>> sebastian. >> >>> On Jun 15, 2:49 pm, Yann Lossouarn <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> Hello, >> >>>> I look for a way to "pipe" the result of a command to another, >>>> but did >>>> not succeed yet. I can't imagine this is not possible, as this is >>>> the >>>> kind of things that is very intuitive, in natural language. For >>>> example, "map this and email it to [email protected]"... Is >>>> there a >>>> way to pipe ? Of not, is it planned ? >> >>>> Bye, >>>> Yann > > -- mitcho (Michael 芳貴 Erlewine) [email protected] http://mitcho.com/ linguist, coder, teacher --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ubiquity-firefox" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ubiquity-firefox?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
