Nathan <[email protected]> wrote: > I have a hard time understanding this claim that using IPA improves > communication. Surely a device intended to facilitate communication > should make accessibility its first priority?
OK, its not about "communication" per se, its just a transcription system for phonetics, that we chose a few years ago to use for pronunciation keys. > I suppose forcing all the various projects to use English might make it > easier for the > people who understand English to read them all; but as it > happens, > there are quite a few people who don't read English comfortably and > we've sacrificed rigid uniformity for actual usefulness. Straw man. Your confusing English with "Roman alphabet" - the latter of which is just about universal at this point. The rest of your argument sort of got lost.. I don't understand what you are saying, except that you are misrepresenting my argument as one about "universality." Gregory Maxwell <[email protected]> wrote: > I think the prospect of a nice machine > synthesizer in the future (with the ability to provide real > recordings, of course) is probably sufficient justification for > continuing to use IPA all by itself. Ah. The minimalist argument. :) -Stevertigo _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
