[Debian-in-workers] Re: Fwd: debian-in-workers@lists.alioth.debian.org; pravi.a@gmail.com; anivar@hackemail.com;vimaljoseph@gmail.com

[Christian Perrier]

>
>
>
> I am pleased to see that the allegations raised by a certain 
> individual some time back that modifications to the Rachana font which 
> were under orginally released under the GNU GPL were subsequently 
> prohibited by the Rachana Akshara Kala Vedi has proved to be false by 
> the mail from Mr. Hussain KH (Rachana Font Designer and Project 
> Co-ordinator).

Well, naming people if you have conflicts with them would help. Sorry to 
be a little rude here, but I suspect some underlying conflicts in which 
I'm totally an outsider and don't want to take position. But at least, I 
want to understand and try to figure out the whole picture..:-)
>
> Thanks also to everyone especially to Christian, Jaldhar, Pravi and 
> Soumyadip for all the support rendered thus far towards the Malayalam 
> localisation of Debian.
>
>
> The Debian-IN Malayalam localisation team has always supported the use 
> of Rachana fonts. We also wish the Rachana Akshara Kala Vedi all the 
> very best in the noble fight they are undertaking to protect the 
> traditional malayalam orthography.

You already explained me the difference between a "traditional" and 
"simplified" way to write Malayalam. What I understand is that local 
authorities have supported the simplified orthography (I guess with the 
intent to improve literacy...something that was done in China in the 
communist years). Am I right?

Is that what is called "Old Lipi"/""New Lipi"?

Even though I perfectly understand that wanting to keep the traditional 
writing style alive is a perfectly valid opinion (preserve cultural 
heritage, etc.), I have the concern of pragmatism when dealing with 
FLOSS localisation: I want our localisation work to be *used*. So, do 
you confirm me that the choice of the "traditional" orthography will not 
make the Malayalam translation an "elite" translation?