Editing Talk:Glossary
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
::Ah, but what meaning comes *first*? Which is implied as most common? There are politics in dictionaries. I agree however that the glossary is not only those terms, and that Wiktionary is not the sole or even best place to enable the Consumerium mission (against [[Consumerism]] without values "u" hold dear). And I totally agree that Wiktionary should not believe Consumerium is altering the meanings of words in any way other than by changing public impression and priority. But hopefully we *will* do that. | ::Ah, but what meaning comes *first*? Which is implied as most common? There are politics in dictionaries. I agree however that the glossary is not only those terms, and that Wiktionary is not the sole or even best place to enable the Consumerium mission (against [[Consumerism]] without values "u" hold dear). And I totally agree that Wiktionary should not believe Consumerium is altering the meanings of words in any way other than by changing public impression and priority. But hopefully we *will* do that. | ||
:::Forget Wiktionary, we need [[Simple English]]. There are now good articles on [[time horizon]], [[contact network]], [[power network]], [[social network]], [[social capital]] here, which mention only the features of it we need to talk about to do work here. Full articles in Simple English will hopefully appear on all the concepts in the [[glossary]], right? These can just appear normally since we aren't using any word in any sense other than its normal sense. There's no distortion involved here, just certain articles we want to get corrected faster than others. | :::Forget Wiktionary, we need [[Simple English]]. There are now good articles on [[time horizon]], [[contact network]], [[power network]], [[social network]], [[social capital]] here, which mention only the features of it we need to talk about to do work here. Full articles in Simple English will hopefully appear on all the concepts in the [[glossary]], right? These can just appear normally since we aren't using any word in any sense other than its normal sense. There's no distortion involved here, just certain articles we want to get corrected faster than others. | ||
---- | |||
A programming language rarely has more than 30-50 verbs and about a hundred reserved nouns. So this can't get too large. Not if it's to get into all those dictionaries. It must be a small virus. | A programming language rarely has more than 30-50 verbs and about a hundred reserved nouns. So this can't get too large. Not if it's to get into all those dictionaries. It must be a small virus. | ||
:30-50 verbs?.. I can't think of even 20: (define, add/change/remove, repeat, fetch, link, compare, convert, read, write... whatelseisthere) but maybe I'm just not a qualified programmer. How many verbs does the [[w:Universal Turing machine]] have? [[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 15:12 Jun 19, 2003 (EEST) | :30-50 verbs?.. I can't think of even 20: (define, add/change/remove, repeat, fetch, link, compare, convert, read, write... whatelseisthere) but maybe I'm just not a qualified programmer. How many verbs does the [[w:Universal Turing machine]] have? [[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 15:12 Jun 19, 2003 (EEST) | ||