canon export

README.md

@@ -76,26 +76,32 @@ configs:
 
 ## What this canon is
 
-**In Amharic, `if` is `ከሆነ`. In Arabic, `return` is `إرجاع`.**
+A centralized standard, created and curated by language communities, for what
+programming concepts are called in each natural language.
 
-The word each programming concept goes by in each human language —
-184 concepts across 51 languages,
-9,375 decisions in all, every one of them carrying the amount of
-review that stands behind it.
+It holds language-specific renderings of programming keywords, builtins and
+exceptions — 184 concepts across 51
+languages, 9,375 decisions — and documents where each language
+stands in that process.
 
-Programming languages are written in English. `if`, `while`, `class`,
-`import`: a developer who does not read English is memorising shapes. Choosing
-what those concepts are called in someone's own language is the work, and
-choosing *well* is a question only speakers of that language can settle.
+It builds on
+[`legesher/language-corpus`](https://huggingface.co/datasets/legesher/language-corpus),
+which gathers every rendering anyone has proposed. The corpus is the full
+record of what has been suggested; the canon is the vocabulary that downstream
+applications actually use.
+
+Programming languages are written in English, so a developer who does not read
+English is memorising shapes rather than reading words. The hard part is not
+the obvious vocabulary. It is the gray areas, where words are borrowed,
+created, or derived from English — `elif` and `lambda` have no obvious answer
+in any language, and settling them takes people who know a language's culture
+and the stories woven into it, not only its grammar.
 
-This is a **growing dataset**. A rendering here is the current answer, not a
-final one: renderings change as speakers of the language weigh in, and each
-one's rung records how much of that has happened yet. Treat a revision as a
-snapshot of the decisions to date.
+This is a growing dataset. A rendering here is the current answer, not a final
+one, and each carries a rung recording how much review stands behind it.
 
 Renderings are keyed by content-addressed uids (`opt_` + 24 hex) shared with
-[`legesher/language-corpus`](https://huggingface.co/datasets/legesher/language-corpus),
-so an `option_uid` resolves there to every alternative that was proposed for
+the corpus, so an `option_uid` resolves there to every alternative proposed for
 that concept and every endorsement attached to them.
 
 ## Languages
@@ -107,53 +113,53 @@ the Hub indexes for search; this is the full list, script subtags and all.
 | Tag | Language | Native name | Renderings | `machine` | `experimental` | `reviewed` | `official` |
 | --- | --- | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
 | `am` | Amharic | አማርኛ | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `ar` | Arabic | العربية | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `bn` | Bengali | বাংলা | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `ar` | Arabic | العربية | 184 | 181 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
+| `bn` | Bengali | বাংলা | 184 | 145 | 39 | 0 | 0 |
 | `bs` | Bosnian | Bosanski | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `ca` | Catalan | Català | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `cs` | Czech | Čeština | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `cy` | Welsh | Cymraeg | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `da` | Danish | Dansk | 183 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `de` | German | Deutsch | 183 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `de` | German | Deutsch | 183 | 147 | 36 | 0 | 0 |
 | `el` | Greek | Ελληνικά | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `en` | English | English | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `es` | Spanish | Español | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `es` | Spanish | Español | 184 | 131 | 53 | 0 | 0 |
 | `fa` | Persian | فارسی | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `fi` | Finnish | Suomi | 183 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `fi` | Finnish | Suomi | 183 | 171 | 12 | 0 | 0 |
 | `fr` | French | Français | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `ga` | Irish | Gaeilge | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `gd` | Scottish Gaelic | Gàidhlig | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `gl` | Galician | Galego | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `gu` | Gujarati | ગુજરાતી | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `he` | Hebrew | עברית | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `hi` | Hindi | हिन्दी | 183 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `gu` | Gujarati | ગુજરાતી | 184 | 143 | 41 | 0 | 0 |
+| `he` | Hebrew | עברית | 184 | 139 | 45 | 0 | 0 |
+| `hi` | Hindi | हिन्दी | 183 | 146 | 37 | 0 | 0 |
 | `hr` | Croatian | Hrvatski | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `hu` | Hungarian | Magyar | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `id` | Indonesian | Bahasa Indonesia | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `it` | Italian | Italiano | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `id` | Indonesian | Bahasa Indonesia | 184 | 145 | 39 | 0 | 0 |
+| `it` | Italian | Italiano | 184 | 137 | 47 | 0 | 0 |
 | `ja` | Japanese | 日本語 | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `kn` | Kannada | ಕನ್ನಡ | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `ko` | Korean | 한국어 | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `lv` | Latvian | Latviešu | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `mk` | Macedonian | Македонски | 183 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `ml` | Malayalam | മലയാളം | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `ml` | Malayalam | മലയാളം | 184 | 170 | 14 | 0 | 0 |
 | `mn-Cyrl` | Mongolian | Монгол | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `ms` | Malay | Bahasa Melayu | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `my` | Burmese | မြန်မာ | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `nb` | Norwegian | Norsk | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `nl` | Dutch | Nederlands | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `pl` | Polish | Polski | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `pt` | Portuguese | Português | 183 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `pt` | Portuguese | Português | 183 | 133 | 50 | 0 | 0 |
 | `ro` | Romanian | Română | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `ru` | Russian | Русский | 183 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `si` | Sinhala | සිංහල | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `sr-Cyrl` | Serbian | Српски | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `su` | Sundanese | Basa Sunda | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `sv` | Swedish | Svenska | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `te` | Telugu | తెలుగు | 183 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `te` | Telugu | తెలుగు | 183 | 155 | 28 | 0 | 0 |
 | `th` | Thai | ไทย | 183 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `tr` | Turkish | Türkçe | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
-| `ur` | Urdu | اردو | 184 | 183 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
+| `ur` | Urdu | اردو | 184 | 154 | 30 | 0 | 0 |
 | `uz-Latn` | Uzbek | O'zbek | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `vi` | Vietnamese | Tiếng Việt | 184 | 184 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
 | `zh-Hans` | Chinese | 中文 | 184 | 153 | 31 | 0 | 0 |
@@ -163,65 +169,77 @@ than read it.
 
 ## The maturity ladder
 
-Every rendering carries a rung. It is the honest answer to "how much human
-judgement is behind this word?", and it is the most important column here.
+Without other global examples to build from, each language's canon starts
+drafted from machines and prior art. From there native speakers move it up:
+`experimental`, then `reviewed`, then `official`. Once a language reaches
+`official`, its canon becomes a resource for the community it exists to serve.
+
+Every rendering carries its own rung, so a language moves as its words do.
 
 ### `machine`
 
-Selected without anyone judging this particular word — carried over from a
-shipped language pack, or picked by a batch job resolving a collision.
+Drafted, not decided. The rendering came from a machine draft or from prior
+art, and no one has weighed in on it since.
 
-It is not arbitrary. Every rendering clears mechanical gates before it can be
-selected at all: it has to be a valid identifier in its language, stable under
-the Unicode normalisation the interpreter applies, and free of collisions with
-other terms in its own vocabulary. What no one has asked is whether it is the
-*right* word — whether a programmer who speaks that language would recognise
-it, or would wince.
+It is not arbitrary. Every rendering clears mechanical checks before it can be
+selected: it has to be a valid identifier in its language, stable under the
+Unicode normalisation the interpreter applies, and free of collisions with
+other terms in its vocabulary. What nobody has asked is whether it is the right
+word — whether a programmer who speaks the language would recognise it.
 
-**Treat these as proposals.**
+Treat these as proposals.
 
 ### `experimental`
 
-A person has looked at this specific rendering and kept it, replaced it, or
-rewritten it — a maintainer curating a batch, or a native speaker of the
-language making a correction.
+A person has engaged with this specific rendering. Either they **chose** it — a
+maintainer curating a batch, a native speaker correcting the word — or they
+**endorsed** it, putting their name behind a rendering someone else proposed.
 
-One informed opinion stands behind it. That is meaningfully more than
-`machine` and meaningfully less than agreement, which is why it is its own
-rung rather than folded into either neighbour.
+Most of the endorsements here predate this dataset: they are the review history
+of the community that built Legesher's original translations, where
+contributors voted on renderings word by word. An endorsement attaches to the
+specific option that was later selected, so it is evidence about *this word*,
+not about the concept in general.
+
+At least one person has weighed in. That is not yet agreement, which is why
+`experimental` is its own rung.
 
 ### `reviewed`
 
-Native speakers have signed off, and more than one, so the rendering reflects
-agreement rather than a single person's preference.
+Several native speakers have signed off, so the rendering reflects agreement
+rather than one person's preference.
 
-The risk with one reviewer is not that they are wrong — it is that they are
-unrepresentative. A regional form, a register that reads formal or childish
-somewhere else, a loanword one community has absorbed and another rejects.
-More than one voice is what turns a rendering into a *shared* answer.
+The risk with a single reviewer is not that they are wrong. It is that they are
+unrepresentative — a regional form, a register that reads formal or childish
+elsewhere, a loanword one community has absorbed and another rejects. More than
+one voice is what makes a rendering a shared answer.
 
-**How many voices, and how varied, is still being defined.** We would rather
-say so than publish a threshold we have not actually set.
+How many voices, and how varied, is still being defined. We would rather say so
+than publish a threshold we have not set.
 
 ### `official`
 
 Ratified in a convened session, and screened.
 
-Screening is a separate axis from accuracy: a rendering can be a perfectly
-correct translation and still be the wrong word to ship — offensive in another
-register, unfortunate beside a neighbouring term, or colliding with something
-in the language it should not. `official` means both questions were asked and
-answered by people with standing to answer them.
+Screening is separate from accuracy. A rendering can be a correct translation
+and still be the wrong word to ship: offensive in another register, unfortunate
+beside a neighbouring term, or colliding with something it should not. A rung
+of `official` means both questions were asked and answered by people with
+standing to answer them.
 
-This is a decision a language community makes. It is not a number a counter
-reaches.
+A language community makes this decision, not a threshold.
 
 ### Where things stand today
 
-0 renderings are at `reviewed` or above. 32 have had a
-native speaker's attention, one reviewer each, which is why they sit at
-`experimental`. The remaining 9,343 are machine or maintainer
-selections that **no native speaker has looked at yet.**
+0 renderings are at `reviewed` or above.
+
+505 sit at `experimental` — chosen or endorsed by at least one
+person, across 15 of the 51 languages here. The
+remaining 8,870 are machine or maintainer selections that **no one has
+weighed in on yet.**
+
+Nothing has reached `reviewed`, because that needs more than one voice and the
+threshold is not set.
 
 We publish at this stage deliberately. A terminology set developed privately
 and released once it is "ready" has already made every decision without the
@@ -274,9 +292,10 @@ rendering, `decided_by` says **who** made the most recent call. A single
 native reviewer is visible here without moving the rung, because their
 judgement is real and is not yet a consensus.
 
-If you program in one of these languages, or speak one not yet covered, these
-renderings want your eyes. Corrections, endorsements and objections all move a
-rendering up the ladder — and disagreement is a contribution, not an obstacle.
+This requires collaboration from people who do not just speak a language other
+than English, but know its culture. If that is you, corrections, endorsements
+and objections all move a rendering up the ladder, and disagreement is a
+contribution rather than an obstacle.
 
 ## Licence and citation
 

data/canon.parquet

@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
 version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1
-oid sha256:5185714e5fc380fb41d01fed10592160c02b1395a4a1e2865f912be2080e3359
-size 373985
+oid sha256:3e764ecdc61b425296e4a578fbf0f3ca80acd94763f120de2b1e69f24ec6abe6
+size 374385

data/locales.parquet

@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
 version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1
-oid sha256:04b6133f7658ab5dafe50d6236b3ca72f7b39af428f0fc5d4e4530008a49e09f
-size 4562
+oid sha256:21495bee721e7d5cb67bda270f76fc50c64a402daa90541294307007496a2f70
+size 4706

reconciliation.json

@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
   "concepts": 184,
   "identity_ok": 208,
   "by_rung": {
-    "machine": 9343,
-    "experimental": 32,
+    "machine": 8870,
+    "experimental": 505,
     "reviewed": 0,
     "official": 0
   },