- From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:16:57 -0400
- To: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
- Cc: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>, Andrew Cunningham <andrewc@vicnet.net.au>, www-international@w3.org
Asmus Freytag scripsit:
> There are parts of the planets where it is common for people to command
> more than one language.
Most of it, indeed.
> Of course, a meta tag that (reliably :-) ) described something as
> 'translation', or conversely as 'official language version' would be
> useful, too.
This would be a good use case for a BCP 47 registered extension,
something like 't-*' to report the translation status of a document.
Off the top of my head, the obvious candidates would be t-original,
t-authentic (for documents which are "equally authentic" in all language
versions), t-polished, t-rough, and t-machine.
> What would be educational in this case, is to create a well-edited list
> of examples, from Norwegian, to Dinka, to examples for the case of
> translation averse bi-linguals, as well as the case of language choices
> needing to be based on (textual) domain or (internet) domain.
Indeed it would. The two difficulties are accuracy, funding, and the
avoidance of political interference. The *three* difficulties ....
--
Business before pleasure, if not too bloomering long before.
--Nicholas van Rijn
John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Received on Monday, 28 April 2008 15:17:34 UTC