Thread history

From Translating talk:MediaWiki
Viewing a history listing
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Time User Activity Comment
12:42, 2 September 2016 Nemo bis (talk | contribs) Summary changed (-purodha)
13:13, 16 September 2015 Purodha (talk | contribs) New reply created (Reply to About [[MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-force-header/ksh, MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-header/ksh, [[MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-content/kMediaWiki:T)
18:32, 14 May 2015 Nemo bis (talk | contribs) Moved  
07:12, 14 May 2015 Nemo bis (talk | contribs) Summary changed (pur)
14:18, 4 March 2015 Purodha (talk | contribs) Changed subject from "About MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-force-header/ksh" to "About MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-force-header/ksh, MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-header/ksh, MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-content/kMediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-force-content/kshsh]]"  
14:18, 4 March 2015 Purodha (talk | contribs) Changed subject from "About MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-force-header/ksh" to "About MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-force-header/ksh, MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-header/ksh, MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-content/kMediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-force-content/kshsh]], ["  
14:16, 4 March 2015 Purodha (talk | contribs) Comment text edited  
14:15, 4 March 2015 Purodha (talk | contribs) Changed subject from "About MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-force-header/ksh" to "About MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-force-header/ksh, MediaWiki:Tpt-discouraged-language-header/ksh,"  
12:37, 4 March 2015 Liuxinyu970226 (talk | contribs) Summary changed  
10:36, 4 March 2015 Purodha (talk | contribs) New thread created  

This messages require grammatical modifications on the language, $1, which we currently do not have. That has been mentioned elsewhere on Support already with some details.

General question: What to do? Shall we merge these cases into GRAMMAR although it is a complete different use case in the languages that I am aware of, or should we rather target to have an own construct (e.g. LANGRAMMAR) for it, or shall we wait and try to have these solved via CLDR?

While I certainly prefer the latter, it is likely going to take years, and does imho not spare us a (generic) LANGRAMMAR.

Purodha Blissenbach (talk)10:36, 4 March 2015

See also T50635.

Purodha Blissenbach (talk)13:13, 16 September 2015