> Graham Samuel wrote:
> The discussion about Open Language is interesting, and the idea may well be a
> good thing. But I for one would rather hear that for the actual development
> team, delivering a rock-solid version of LiveCode on all supported platforms
> is taking a massive priority over even thinking about this stuff. Peter
> Brett, can you reassure me, as a member of the use list?
They do take priority. Look at the output. Especially PeterBrett with HTML5,
where he also has to be at the top of new internet wording/language. By coding
only he is not challenged ("er ist unterfordert" in german words).
And honestly, RichmondMatth demonstrates here once again his wonderful treasury
of words, he should write a monthly feuilleton "Around LiveCode", with
annotations by MarkWieder (I love his impish humour).
There were a lot of really good arguments in this discussion, we need time to
think about it.
Perhaps MarkWadd and the team should think from time to time about a basic set
of words and phrasing options oriented on (the idea of) Ogden's Basic English?
Currently commandNames+functionNames+constantNames+propertyNames add up to over
thousand words, Ogden's first list had 800 words.
Open language doesn't mean to only to add words to the basic set of words, one
could also start with diminishing to #codeEssentials and add to that.
No problems will arise, there will be a translator to the #codeEssentials, just
as there is one from English to Ogden's Basic English.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
