On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote: > I totally agree that there are translation dictionaries for many languages. > However, putting such content to work IS a big issue.Typically such > dictionaries are only available as a dead wood publication. People either > have one or don't and the only thing they are good for is finding the > corresponding word in the other language anyway.
That is a fair and an extremely pertinent point. However, dictionaries (if we are using the same meaning for the word!) are by themselves merely lists of words. A lack of a freely available dictionary or, a list of translated terms is not a complete blocker to content. A lack of a strong spell checker might be. But, I wouldn't put such emphasis on an organized list like a dictionary. > My point is that such content be put to work. And, my take is that what is required is more focused and stronger investment over repeated cycles into automated translation systems, especially perhaps Statistical-MT. > Yes, I totally agree that there are issues to use many languages on the > Internet. However, the WMF has in its tooling the ability to bring you > webfonts and input methods for many/most languages. When we get to work with > publishers / enthusiasts for specific languages we CAN add these to the > existing languages. As the WMF toolkit can be used on Chrome and Firefox > browsers, it means that this toolkit is very much avaiclaanble for more > languages. Webfonts and, Input methods are aids - they seed first round of content generation and, continue to impact generation of content over a period. For example, ULS has made it possible for content creators of websites to stop worrying about having to limit themselves to a couple of languages. But, what's beyond ULS? Surely there is something that needs to be improved. Where's the plan for the "WMF Toolkit"? An analogy would be chalk and, blackboard. However, writing materials are not limited *only to* chalk and blackboard or, quills and parchment. There is a need to push sustained and well thought out efforts into creation of content that is relevant, available and, especially well curated. Unfortunately, WMF has not done much discussion in public about content translation pieces except for a thread of ideas initiated by Erik. And, I have not read any plan of action that talks about how to even think about doing this and, making it available. Then again, the content of the world is not limited to Wikipedia. Content is being created/written everywhere (even this discussion is content perhaps worth having in multiple languages) > So yes, there are more problems but for many if not most languages content > is king if we want to bring more languages to the Internet. And, yes we can > when we put our lexical content to it. I am not disagreeing with your position. I am merely citing that there needs to be augmentation to the basic plumbing of languages that is already existing and, there needs to be some thought about what the next step of efforts would be. -- sankarshan mukhopadhyay <https://twitter.com/#!/sankarshan> _______________________________________________ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindiafirstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l