Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69045C000E for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 22:36:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 591C083077 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 22:36:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.87 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.87 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.117, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.347, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sky-ip.org Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aPn7f3wAqO_C for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 22:36:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:07:25 by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from ob2-3.mailhostbox.com (ob2-3.mailhostbox.com [162.222.225.19]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2600B82F31 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 22:36:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [0.0.0.0] (unknown [185.247.225.61]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: s7r@sky-ip.org) by outbound.mailhostbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC5FE7824E8; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 22:29:10 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sky-ip.org; s=20110108; t=1628116152; bh=6An6viYPXE97aIqNt+nvyaGCGm2zIv6PPZ4fjL6I2/o=; h=To:References:From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To; b=LWq0DdfTHXZZVw89Cl9HFEpqKkcK+kUGz1QytAE5VXJE7K/sVChvwlAsFUIB9iwkV 9EzBG7LP76q0VnHtcQTpAVc8zUejqgpwlFwDhPEiBnSIuuiim+aUs/Jt+T4ZUQPmoF z3yD0jAgkaMUgZqVQzBxI0BjvfaqnvLkdauffYfk= To: ic , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , Justin Valceanu References: <112f5fa6-510c-8280-4f65-fbb0d41a5aa4@odm.ro> <680CB4BF-5991-4648-8DF0-78077E514482@benappy.com> From: s7r Message-ID: <3e1f87f0-f221-6e58-acd6-4312fc8ecb9b@sky-ip.org> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 01:29:07 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <680CB4BF-5991-4648-8DF0-78077E514482@benappy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CMAE-Score: 0 X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=M8Eulw8s c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=610b14b7 a=8ngV7XzgidaobyIc9Zt4lw==:117 a=8ngV7XzgidaobyIc9Zt4lw==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=vKaRNsXCUW9Yw8D1qsEA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bip-0039/Wordlist - Romanian X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2021 22:36:39 -0000 ic via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Hi, > >> On 4 Aug 2021, at 12:30, Justin Valceanu via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> >> I have created a new Romanian wordlist for Bip-0039; >> Requesting permission to push to github the attached modified files. > > Although I don’t think it ’s hard requirement, it would be great if the words could be uniquely identified using the first 4 letters (most metal backup “plates” only have space for 4 letters). > > I see several occurrences of conflicting words in the first page alone. > > ++ ic > I am +1 on the unique identification using the first 4 letters, makes it easy for restoring from seed on mobile wallets. Don't know if this is really a blocker but since RO is a rich enough language in terms of words, this shouldn't be too hard. Also, world list is not acceptable in this form. it should be revised by someone with knowledge in Romanian lexical area, I just briefly reviewed and: - _adesiv_ shouldn't be *adeziv* ? - _walkman_ - this is not a Romanian word, while it is of course sometimes used in Romania. - _web_ - this is not a Romanian word, while it is of course sometimes used in Romania. - _yachting_ - this is not a Romanian word and it most certainly not used in Romania :)) Why not use *navigatie* or something? - _topmodel_ - it's two words merged in one - _acvatic_ and _acvaplanare_ - they are both independent words but very close to each other while one is an adjective and one substantive. These two for example break the "no confusing words" spec. I didn't review the entire word list and no sense to make this message too long, but I'm sure you see the point. Word list needs changes, please correct.