[PLUG] Interesting ...
sankarshan.mukhopadhyay at gmail.com
Thu Sep 20 22:47:16 PDT 2007
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Much of what follows is probably going to be OT, but then it may
> become a separate thread so I am taking a risk...
> I do not agree with your viewpoint fully...
But that's perfectly reasonable...
> Let's take example... (of course OT) Nokia low end handsets have
> better or much support for indic languages than high end phones... So
> if anything is going to be done then it should be done by enabling
> indic languages fully on existing distro for the endusers and not
> worrying about applications availability. Applications and everything
> else will get developed because sheer numbers of users wanting and
> using those languages will push it to necessary level of localization.
Extending the same example, Nokia high end *and* low end handsets in
specific regions have more than robust support for CJK rather than go
the full spectrum of CJKI. I tend to take Nokia and Samsung as applied
innovation driven by business needs - you want to aim at the long tail
of consumers - play by their rules and don't try to impose your own rules.
But that was not precisely what stated. A operating system is in a crude
sense a container to allow actions to be performed by the consumers of
the operation system. That said what gets consumed is applications and
services. So, in effect, if l10n and i18n are to be robustly supported,
it has to be done at both the OS and the application level. What the OS
would provide is a set of framework or tools that would enable
applications to be developed. If the by now cliche phrase of User Driven
Innovation is applied, then development of applications should be driven
by the user need. However, that would be counterproductive since it
takes away the differentiator from any project. A far fetched example -
a vehicle is ready to be certified for the next level of emission tests,
but actually does not perform the check since there is no demand - that
does not make it stick in the market.
12+ Indic languages are in somewhat more better shape than they were at
least 3 years ago. The moot question is - how many of the potential and
current PC users do actually use it ? I don't see too many bugs/issues
being reported and there is a fair bit of chance that the silence on the
bugzillas are a direct result of the efforts not being used.
There is this chimera of l10n and i18n actively driving ICT4D since now
with the OS localized more folks would be able to use it. I deliberately
call it a chimera - ICT4D if it ever were to depend on localization
would require applications and services that enable the 3 key things -
input - display - output.
> How many of us who talk about indic enabling actually ask for indic
> enbled phones/devices when they actually have to make a decision to
> buy new tool/instrument. I am sure the common man does not make those
> compromises that we educated people tend to make so easily.
Like I keep on asking - how many of us use hi_IN or mr_IN on the
interface / input and report issues (not limiting such reports to
mailing lists) ?
You see things; and you say 'Why?';
But I dream things that never were;
and I say 'Why not?' - George Bernard Shaw
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the plug-mail