<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
W dniu 19-12-06 o 14:11, Martin Constantino–Bodin pisze:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:76005480-fb85-f070-dfdd-185f90b282d2@ens-lyon.org">Probably
the most important point: the goal of the Esperanto community is
not to overcome English in some kind of epic battle. It is to
provide language diversity and avoid language imperialism. Hence,
the main point of the community is not that Esperanto should be
used as the international language instead of English, it’s that
there should not be one unique international language: Esperanto
should be an international language, not the international
language ☺ Anyway, the Esperanto movement is complex, and some
parts of it just states that Esperanto should be used for
pragmatical reasons as it costs much less to teach it than other
languages (a good instance of this is <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapport_Grin"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapport_Grin</a>
).</blockquote>
EO<br>
Problemo estas, ke anglaj imperiistoj volas altrudi sian lingvo al
aliaj nacioj; kaj ne komprenas (ne volas kompreni) se iu skribas en
alia lingvo ol la angla, ĉu estas tiel malfacile uzi tradukilon de
Google/Yandex/Bing?<br>
PL<br>
Problemem jest to, że angielscy imperialiści chcą narzucić swój
język innym narodom; i nie rozumieją (nie chcą zrozumieć) jak ktoś
pisze w innym jeżyku niż angielski, czy jest tak trudno skorzystać z
tłumacza Google/Yandex/Bing?<br>
EN<br>
<span class="tlid-translation translation" lang="en"><span title=""
class="">The problem is that the English imperialists want to
impose their language on other nations;</span> <span title=""
class="">and do not understand (do not want to understand) how
someone writes in a language other than English, is it so
difficult to use Google / Yandex / Bing?</span></span><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">W dniu 19-12-06 o 00:02, Joseph
Eisenberg pisze:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP_2vPgkJ8_++CNZZ3t0M2jraSbcmbTeCZWd1wdnCFSL6Mx+jg@mail.gmail.com">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">for smaller seas, I suggest adding names in all official / main languages of adjacent countries, so instead of "Black Sea" there will be:
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Karadeniz Marea Neagră Чорне море | Черно море | Чёрное море | შავი ზღვა
That's fine.</pre>
</blockquote>
EO<br>
La ĝusta signo por disigi nomojn estas “/”, baldaŭ mi komencos
ŝanĝi!<br>
PL<br>
Właściwym znakiem rozdzielającym jest „/”, zaraz zacznę zmieniać!<br>
EN<br>
<span class="tlid-translation translation" lang="en"><span title=""
class="">The correct separator is "/", I will start changing!</span></span><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">W dniu 19-12-06 o 08:04, Maarten Deen
pisze:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7f8c9b163762b7dd61640aff8307a874@xs4all.nl">On
2019-12-05 22:12, Tomek wrote: <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">EN:
<br>
In what language should the names of interstate objects be: seas
/
<br>
bays, continents, oceans, poles? They are not currently
displayed on
<br>
the default map(1), programs (e.g. OsmAnd, iD and JOSM editors)
use
<br>
the name:LANGUAGE label, so the content of the "name" label is
<br>
ideological only, not practical.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I disagree that the name tag is ideological. Maybe you use the
wrong word and meant theoretical?
</blockquote>
EO<br>
Ne havanta praktikan signifon (ĉiuj uzas name:LINGVO), nur por esti
tien.<br>
PL<br>
Nie mający praktycznego znaczenia (wszyscy korzystają z name:JĘZYK),
tylko na pokaz.<br>
EN<br>
<span class="tlid-translation translation" lang="en"><span title=""
class="">Not of practical importance (everyone uses the
name:LANGUAGE), just for show.</span></span><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">W dniu 19-12-06 o 10:33, Oleksiy
Muzalyev pisze:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:9fd78bdd-77f3-e8b1-fc4f-2169eac59ff1@bluewin.ch">
<p>For many geographical names there are articles in the Latin
version of Wikipedia. For example, for the Black Sea: <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontus_Euxinus">https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontus_Euxinus</a></p>
<p>for Poland: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonia">https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonia</a>
, for Canada: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada">https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada</a>
, etc.<br>
</p>
<p>So if one wishes to add a name in Latin, i.e. name:la in the
editor, it is possible just to look it up in the Latin version
of Wikipedia. <br>
</p>
<p>The Latin language was widely used in the cartography and in
science in general over the past centuries. For example Isaac
Newton's book "Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica", one
of the most important works in the history of science, was
published in 1687 in Latin. <br>
</p>
<p>And it is still used in science nowadays. The legacy of the Rēs
pūblica Rōmāna & Imperium Rōmānum, including its language,
is so enormous that it can never get extinct. At the same time
the Latin does not have a standing army any more. <br>
</p>
<p>So it is indeed kind of neutral. What is beneficial and safer
for mappers in some parts. Besides the name in Latin is often
recognizable for people who speak English, French, German, etc.
Even for people from the Cyrillic, Chinese, Korean, etc.
background it is often also understandable, since the Latin
alphabet is studied at the elementary school.</p>
</blockquote>
EO<br>
Anstataŭ Latino eblas uzi Interlingvaon:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingvao">https://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingvao</a><br>
tio ĉi estas “rekreita kaj simpligita” Latino.<br>
PL<br>
Zamiast łaciny można korzystać z Interlingwy:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingua">https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingua</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://sites.google.com/site/jezykinterlingua/">https://sites.google.com/site/jezykinterlingua/</a><br>
jest to coś tak jakby „odtworzona i uproszczona” łacina.<br>
EN<br>
<span class="tlid-translation translation" lang="en"><span title="">Instead
of Latin, you can use </span></span><span
class="tlid-translation translation" lang="en"><span title=""><span
class="tlid-translation translation" lang="en"><span title="">Interlingua</span></span>:</span><br>
<span title=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingua">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingua</a></span><br>
<span title="" class="">it is something like "recreated and
simplified" Latin.</span></span><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">W dniu 19-12-06 o 10:53, Maarten Deen
pisze:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:0fa7f0b0a30e397fea85ddca058c0fe3@xs4all.nl">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">Still, it is a
Good Idea to have one standard (language) to
<br>
communicate
<br>
or define things, like everything meant for an international
public
<br>
in
<br>
the wiki is English and the tag system is English.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
you should argue why it is a good idea to have <span
class="moz-txt-underscore"><span class="moz-txt-tag">_</span>one<span
class="moz-txt-tag">_</span></span> standard language
<br>
in the project. IMHO it excludes many billions of people from
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Depens on what you use it for. I'm sure you're not arguing for
having tag names in chinese. These are all in (UK) English. The
same goes for the majority of the wiki pages geared towards the
basis of this project. Sure, there are translations (and that is
good), but the English page is usually the guideline. <br>
I see nothing bad in that. Yes, it implies that you need to be
relatively proficient in English to be able to contribute there,
but what is the alternative? Going to Esperanto or Chinese will
put more people off the project than it will attract</blockquote>
EO<br>
La ununuraj argumentoj por la angla lingvo estas:<br>
1) ĝi estas jam uzata<br>
2) Usono estis ekonomia potenco dum la 20‑centjaro;<br>
la retpaĝo de OSM estas jam tradukita al EO, iD redaktilo ankaŭ; mi
ne proponas (kaj ne proponos) ŝanĝi OSM‑etikedojn, kutima uzanto ne
devas scii pri OSM‑etikedoj.<br>
PL<br>
Jedynymi argumentami za używaniem języka angielskiego są:<br>
1) jest już używany<br>
2) USA była potęgą ekonomiczną w XX wieku;<br>
strona główna OSM i edytor iD są przetłumaczone na EO; nie proponuję
i nie zaproponuję zmiany tagowania OSM, zwykły użytkownik i tak nie
musi wiedzieć co to tag.<br>
EN<br>
<span class="tlid-translation translation" lang="en"><span title="">The
only arguments for using English are:</span><br>
<span title="">1) is already in use</span><br>
<span title="">2) the USA was an economic power in the 20th
century;</span><br>
<span title="" class="">OSM main page and iD editor are translated
into EO;</span></span><span class="tlid-translation translation"
lang="en"><span title="" class=""> I don't suggest and won't
suggest OSM tag change, a regular user doesn't need to know what
a tag is.</span></span><span class="tlid-translation
translation" lang="en"><span title="" class=""></span></span><span
class="tlid-translation translation" lang="en"><span title=""
class=""></span></span><span class="tlid-translation
translation" lang="en"><span title="" class=""></span></span>
</body>
</html>