[HN Gopher] Bogota's website has sign language titles
___________________________________________________________________
Bogota's website has sign language titles
Author : pob54
Score : 75 points
Date : 2022-10-02 15:11 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (bogota.gov.co)
(TXT) w3m dump (bogota.gov.co)
| ankaAr wrote:
| I think is nice how teach us that are deaf people with the same
| needings like us, that we are not deaf. Visibilization and
| inclusion, even when they can read properly.
|
| I'm not seeing this as a waste of money (of course it could be
| anyway)
| gus_massa wrote:
| The site is in Spanish, but the idea of the post is easy to
| understand anyway. [Hi from Argentina!]
|
| If you hover your mouse over the menus, they expand and show the
| text in sing language in a gif. [It may be the
| local/latam/spanish version instad of the USA version. I don't
| know neither.]
|
| Anyway, is this useful for deaf people? How many deaf can
| understand sign languages but not understand written language? I
| think there are a few gramar and idiom differences, but I don't
| expect that to be a problem. It may be useful for small children,
| but it's the site of the city of Bogota, so I expect that all
| users are adults.
| gedy wrote:
| > anyway, is this useful for deaf people?
|
| I'm speaking out of my expertise here, but my understanding is
| some deaf people don't consider written English, Spanish, etc.
| to be their "native language", like their variant of signing
| is.
|
| As a non-deaf person (but with hearing loss), I find that to be
| a little excessive for a website (a something roughly
| equivalent to a book), but to each their own.
| prepend wrote:
| > my understanding is some deaf people don't consider written
| English, Spanish, etc. to be their "native language", like
| their variant of signing is
|
| This is interesting and I wonder what their "native language"
| written version is. As a native English speaker, written
| English isn't native to me either but it's the written
| expression of my language. If someone learns ASL, isn't
| English also the written representation of their "spoken"
| language?
| richbell wrote:
| > If someone learns ASL, isn't English also the written
| representation of their "spoken" language?
|
| No, because the grammar is completely different. In many
| cases it isn't possible to literally translate a sentence
| between ASL and English, so a trained interpreter would
| instead try to convey the general sentiment.
|
| My partner often describes sign languages as a completely
| different modality; deaf people's dreams tend to be
| completely different than hearing people's dreams, for
| example.
| prepend wrote:
| What's the written representation of ASL? Is it really a
| preference to use glyphs instead of letters?
|
| I'm not sure what dreams has to do with written
| representations. I'm not hard of hearing and I don't
| dream in writing and sounds are completely different in
| my dreams than waking life.
| richbell wrote:
| > What's the written representation of ASL? Is it really
| a preference to use glyphs instead of letters?
|
| That's the thing: unlike most spoken languages, sign
| languages don't have written equivalents. Deaf people
| often use the written language of their local community,
| however, someone who speaks Spanish Sign Language writing
| in Spanish has more to do with geography than
| linguistics.
|
| > I'm not sure what dreams has to do with written
| representations. I'm not hard of hearing and I don't
| dream in writing and sounds are completely different in
| my dreams than waking life.
|
| My point was that their brains experience and process
| information differently than hearing people: it isn't
| just that sign languages are visual while spoken
| languages are audible. It's difficult to understand why
| and how deaf people's experiences differ without talking
| to an actual deaf person.
| dhosek wrote:
| There are written equivalents for sign languages,
| although their use is controversial among some (but not
| all) Deaf people. Spoken language is essentially one-
| dimensional: it's a series of phonemes (and tones, even
| in non-tonal language--consider the difference between
| "It's here." and "It's here?") in a chronological order.
| The movements that make up sign language are a bit more
| difficult to represent in that one-dimensional sequence,
| although not impossible. I imagine that millennia ago
| when written languages were created, there was similar
| resistance to replacing sounds with marks on
| mud/bone/stone/bark/etc.
| richbell wrote:
| > There are written equivalents for sign languages,
| although their use is controversial among some (but not
| all) Deaf people.
|
| Interesting, I haven't encountered any in my neck of the
| woods (albeit I am hearing and not really active in of
| deaf communities outside of family). Do you know what the
| most "popular" written equivalents would be?
|
| I don't think it's _impossible_ to represent sign
| languages in written form, either via existing languages
| like English or newly developed glyphs and symbols.
| However, people often don 't seem to understand how
| complex deaf culture and languages are, likely because
| deaf communities can be quite insular (either by choice
| or because of discrimination/isolation), which makes it a
| difficult problem to discuss. Developing a fluent method
| of bidirectional communication between hearing an deaf
| people requires a fair bit of empathy, and I suspect the
| only people who really understand both deaf and hearing
| 'culture' are codas[0]; that said, I'd hope that raising
| awareness about common misconceptions would go a long
| way.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_of_deaf_adult
| clamprecht wrote:
| This may be a dumb question, but could it be to help deaf
| people who know sign language but can't read/write?
| prepend wrote:
| Does this exist? I always assumed that sign language was
| taught after reading and writing. I wonder how common it is
| to have someone proficient in sign language but illiterate.
| marci wrote:
| > I always assumed that sign language was taught after
| reading and writing.
|
| Basically, you're saying "I always assumed that speaking
| was taught after reading and writing." (which can happen,
| but is far from being the norm)
| richbell wrote:
| > I always assumed that sign language was taught after
| reading and writing.
|
| Sign languages are often people's first language. If you're
| like me, you probably learned english as a toddler through
| magic and were later enrolled in school where you refined
| your spoken and written abilities. For many deaf children
| english is a second language.
| dhosek wrote:
| For children born deaf, sign language can be (and should
| be) their first language. It turns out, incidentally, that
| a baby's ability to form signs comes earlier than their
| ability to vocalize, even for hearing children, so there
| are benefits for using sign language even with hearing
| children. My children learned some basic signs as infants
| (water, bathroom, more). I really need to get on the ball
| about learning ASL properly (and my family as well since
| they'll need it just as much as me) since my cochleae are
| on an ineluctable road to deafness and at some point, maybe
| ten years, maybe thirty, maybe never, I will be unable to
| hear instead of being merely hearing impaired.
| [deleted]
| canjobear wrote:
| > I think there are a few gramar and idiom differences
|
| Sign languages are unrelated to spoken languages: they're not
| just sign representations of existing languages like English
| and Spanish, they are independent languages. But deaf people do
| learn to read spoken languages in school, essentially as a
| foreign language.
| Angostura wrote:
| Not unrelated. Closely related, but different.
| klyrs wrote:
| ASL and English are not closely related. Reason being that
| ASL was derived from French, not English.
| richbell wrote:
| Yeah, that is a confusing element to explain about sign
| languages. For example, Spanish Sign Language is called
| that because it's a language regional to Spain, not
| because it's related to Spanish.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| _sign languages_ are not universal, they are just a
| parallel set of languages. ASL isn 't a blanket term for
| sign language, especially in the context of a non-English
| nexus.
| klyrs wrote:
| Note my specific contrast of ASL vs English. General
| statements about sign languages (such as calling them
| "parallel" languages) are frequently inaccurate. The
| comment you responded to is a counterexample to a
| generalization.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| Thats.... Ok. Convenient.
|
| Nobody was talking about English before you except to
| illustrate how they dont map one to one in a variety of
| languages. But I can acknowledge your contribution to
| this thread.
| canjobear wrote:
| No, they're unrelated in exactly the same way that the
| English language and Chinese language are unrelated. There
| may be lots of vocabulary overlap (in the form of finger-
| spellings) but the grammar and basic vocabulary have
| independent origins.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| I think it's more useful at the opposite - introducing non-deaf
| people to sign language. It's pretty neat as long as it's
| unobtrusive.
| jt2190 wrote:
| > Anyway, is this useful for deaf people? How many deaf can
| understand sign languages but not understand written language?
|
| When I was doing accessibility work, I was told point-blank by
| a deaf person that the reading comprehension of the average
| deaf person was quite poor, because to a deaf person English is
| their second language. (Their first language being, of course,
| sign language.)
|
| With that in mind, we should think of it like the average
| English-reader's ability to correctly comprehend Bogota's web
| site: A few will be fluent, but large portion won't be able to
| understand it at all.
| aendruk wrote:
| Screen recording: https://cloudflare-
| ipfs.com/ipfs/QmZyY1Q6B1SQDFC1Qt5rT7qcVkz... (276 kB)
| butz wrote:
| I thought they be doing something interesting to match video
| background with background color of element it is displayed on,
| but alas, each video has appropriate background baked in.
| userbinator wrote:
| At least they didn't also add Braille.
| atentaten wrote:
| my sentiments exactly
| richbell wrote:
| To anyone confused: sign languages are distinct languages in and
| of themselves, with their own etymology, not simply a visual
| medium for existing languages. My understanding is that it's many
| deaf people's preferred method of communication, even if they can
| also read and write; some deaf people can read lips, but most
| don't.
|
| Unfortunately, many older deaf people were denied access to
| education and thus cannot read or write fluently in other
| languages. COVID was actually a huge improvement in accessibility
| for deaf people as major governments and news organizations
| started including sign language interpreters in their broadcasts.
| bicijay wrote:
| Ok, im going to sound very ignorant here and im sorry for that.
| Do deaf people have trouble reading words as well?
| victor22 wrote:
| Having worked with Colombia Gvmnt IT I'd bet money that this is
| just an overpriced website build that delivered on a careless
| written fature request.
| ugjka wrote:
| And the actual accessibility is not that great
| https://accessibilitytest.org/results/HEU-NOIXMBVk
| mjhay wrote:
| That sounds like American government IT as well.
| klyrs wrote:
| In much of the world, deaf people have additional barriers to
| accessing education, so the population does see an elevated
| rate of illiteracy.
| prepend wrote:
| Do you have a source for this? I would expect that any
| education system that teaches sign also teaches reading.
|
| So it would be good to share the stats you use to understand
| how dead people have elevated rates of illiteracy.
| bee_rider wrote:
| I'm not sure about illiteracy rates, but generally I think
| it is well known that the education system doesn't serve
| deaf students as well as their hearing counterparts. Note
| that the second link tries to debunk a statistic, but
| really more contextualizes it to not look so bad.
|
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15454499/
|
| http://www.redeafined.com/2012/04/debunking-fourth-grade-
| rea...
| richbell wrote:
| I suspect there aren't many academic sources detailing the
| discrimination faced by deaf people, though there might be
| compilations of first-hand accounts. The deaf community is
| fairly insular.
|
| My partner's father was born in India as the eldest of
| several boys. Despite his family being well-off, he was
| treated as a burden and most of his family refused to learn
| IPSL to be able to communicate with him. His mother and
| father weren't supportive of his personal, academic, or
| business pursuits; his brothers all went to prestigious
| foreign universities and became highly educated. He made
| his own way to Canada where he learned his 4th and 5th
| languages, ASL and English, and started a family with a
| deaf girl his family had arranged a marriage to. The man
| has gumption, but was never really able to escaped the
| poverty line.
| ars wrote:
| It's a different language. Sign, and English (or Spanish, etc)
| whether written or spoken, is a different language from Sign.
|
| I would assume close to 100% of deaf people will learn to read
| that language, but it should still be remembered it's a second
| language to them.
| yreg wrote:
| But only the menus are translated to a sign language (I don't
| know which one). The actual content of the site is not. So
| the question of how is this useful remains.
| robin_reala wrote:
| Also worth pointing out that there's not one sign language.
| ASL (American sign language) and BSL (British sign language)
| are different languages from each other, and from English as
| well.
| bigyikes wrote:
| Can you have an accent in sign language? Might someone from
| New York sign differently than someone from Los Angeles?
| Dracophoenix wrote:
| If by accent, you mean an idiolect, perhaps, but such an
| "accent" is likely limited to families or in-jokes among
| friends. Geographic differences in sign languages are
| more comparable to differences in dialects. Thus, some
| sign languages are more mutually intelligible than
| others.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha%27s_Vineyard_Sign_La
| ngu...
| rectang wrote:
| It seems inevitable that slight changes of gesture or
| angle or rhythm would emerge in isolated signing
| populations, analogous to the way accents develop in
| isolated speaking populations.
| smscott wrote:
| Absolutely. There are accents, idioms, and even different
| signs for the same word that may vary between region,
| generation, and personal history with the language. e.g a
| southerner can likely guess someone is from the northeast
| with high confidence and vice versa. People raised Deaf
| can often tell if another person is hearing, or someone
| who was raised mainstream without access to sign language
| until later in life. There can also be family/hyperlocale
| idioms or even individual signs that won't be readily
| understood outside the group; I think this is true for
| most languages as forms of inside jokes and the like. Two
| words in ASL that I've noted have a few distinct signs in
| different areas are strawberry and mean ("he is a mean
| person").
| baby wrote:
| This is cute, but not useful as deaf/mute people can read. Also,
| doesn't translate properly (remember, different countries tend to
| have different sign languages).
| jonathankoren wrote:
| Why are you assuming this doesn't translate? I would assume
| that the government at least has a sign language interpreter
| that would notice that page is wrong within a minute of using
| it.
| baby wrote:
| to support locals you'd have to create gifs for every sign
| languages out there. That doesn't scale as easily as text.
| richbell wrote:
| > not useful as deaf/mute people can read
|
| Not all of them can: that's why accessibility is important.
| catiopatio wrote:
| > Not all of them can: that's why accessibility is important.
|
| No, that's why education is important.
|
| If they can't read, that's a failure of education; fix it
| there.
|
| That's a lot cheaper and more effective than trying to force
| the entire world to publish sign-language gif pop-ups as an
| accessibility measure on their written documents.
| richbell wrote:
| > No, that's why education is important.
|
| > If they can't read, that's a failure of education; fix it
| there.
|
| You can tackle more than one thing at a time. Improving the
| education system doesn't necessarily help older
| generations, for example.
| prepend wrote:
| The education system shouldn't only serve children and is
| part of a lifelong process.
|
| My community has many education and training programs for
| people of all ages. Even ones targeted at helping
| retirement age seniors read.
|
| I don't think it's a good idea to incorrectly assume that
| the education system only serves kids.
| richbell wrote:
| > The education system shouldn't only serve children and
| is part of a lifelong process.
|
| I agree. Unfortunately, in many places it barely serves
| children, let alone the rest of the community.
|
| But this is tangential to my original point, which is
| that reasonable accommodations are good and that you can
| improve accessibility and education at the same time.
| Loic wrote:
| I am not sure why you are down voted, in Germany, we have
| about 6 millions adults who are functionally illiterate. This
| is a big issue.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| This could also be framed as a failure of the educational
| system.
| klyrs wrote:
| https://www.dw.com/en/millions-of-germans-have-trouble-
| readi...
|
| Roughly half of the illiteracy rate in Germany is due to
| migrants who are not native German speakers. Framing this
| as a failure of the educational system would be rather
| ignorant, as that's at most half of the problem.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| I'd think it would be a priority to educate immigrants to
| a level where they're able to be self-sufficient as well.
| gus_massa wrote:
| Illiteracy in that article means illiteracy in German or
| illiteracy in their native language?
|
| Also...
|
| > _More than 6 million adults in Germany struggle to read
| and write simple texts in German, a new study has found._
|
| Can they read enough to navigate some menus in German?
| richbell wrote:
| I suspect people misinterpret me pointing out that a group
| has been historically discriminated against and denied
| education, or at least not being provided accommodations
| that allow them to participate, as being bigoted.
|
| A lot of people don't realize that the dominant language of
| a country is usually a deaf person's second or third
| language. Thus, they may be more comfortable speaking in
| their first language, sign language (which is regional and
| not one global language*).
| [deleted]
| prepend wrote:
| What about non-deaf people who can't read? How do they
| experience the site?
|
| Isn't accessibility important for non-readers? I would expect
| there are more illiterate people who can hear than dead
| people who are illiterate.
|
| Either way, it seems like the best way for the site to
| accommodate visitors is to use accessibility features so
| their written content can be used by screen readers for the
| sight impaired but also sign language displayers for people
| who prefer sign language and text to speech for people who
| can't read but can hear.
|
| I don't think accessibility should be binary for one or the
| other but dedicating resources to visual sign language seems
| like a luxury that most sites can't afford.
| richbell wrote:
| > Either way, it seems like the best way for the site to
| accommodate visitors is to use accessibility features so
| their written content can be used by screen readers for the
| sight impaired but also sign language displayers for people
| who prefer sign language and text to speech for people who
| can't read but can hear.
|
| While the implementation could definitely be improved, I
| can't fault them for trying. Perhaps stuff like this will
| be streamlined in the next decade.
|
| > I don't think accessibility should be binary for one or
| the other but dedicating resources to visual sign language
| seems like a luxury that most sites can't afford.
|
| You could make the same argument about making sites
| compatible with screen readers -- and many do. At the end
| of the day, I think it's reasonable for government services
| to be held to a higher standard of accessibility.
| prepend wrote:
| In the US there is a standard in the ADA called section
| 508 that specifies what is required.
|
| I can fault them for trying if their failure makes it
| harder for people to access the site. At the end of the
| day there's a fixed dev budget and if it's spent on one
| thing and misses other important things that's bad. It is
| nice that they have good intentions and it's better than
| nothing. But they should be faulted so they can correct
| the fault and do better next time.
| richbell wrote:
| > But they should be faulted so they can correct the
| fault and do better next time.
|
| I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
| They're clearly trying to do better as this is a fairly
| novel approach. Is it perfect? No. But I'm puzzled by the
| weirdly negative and aggressive reaction this is getting.
|
| Deaf people are often neglected and forgotten about. My
| partner's father is deaf and when he visits government
| services, had medical appointments, etc., they almost
| never provide an interpreter -- despite it being a legal
| requirement he requests in advance which is fully
| subsidized -- because they assume that writing stuff down
| on paper or making vague gestures is adequate. If
| awareness and accessibility for deaf people is this bad
| in a major Canadian metropolitan area, imagine how bad it
| is in smaller areas and countries.
| prepend wrote:
| My point is that there are accessibility standards. If a
| site doesn't follow them and instead does something else,
| even with good intentions, that should be pointed out so
| they do better next time.
|
| I don't think I feel terribly negative other than if the
| goal is to accommodate dead people then the site made a
| poor decision that whirl accommodating some dead people
| made it harder for other people who need different
| accessibilities.
|
| I don't think the issue is awareness so much as
| accommodation. I think resources are better spent on
| solving the problems that can be solved rather than
| raising awareness.
| richbell wrote:
| > I don't think the issue is awareness so much as
| accommodation. I think resources are better spent on
| solving the problems that can be solved rather than
| raising awareness.
|
| This is a false dichotomy: we can do both. And I
| respectfully disagree about the issue not being
| awareness. The comments on this post itself demonstrates
| the lack of awareness and understanding about deaf
| people's experience.
| thih9 wrote:
| Is there a way to see it in a mobile browser? (Safari in my case)
| yreg wrote:
| Works for me in mobile Safari: https://i.imgur.com/yCdSMUq.jpg
| logicalmonster wrote:
| What good does it do a deaf person who can't read to arrive at
| pages that are not sign-translated?
|
| Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but the reason that this
| feels like a combination of government-waste and possibly virtue-
| signaling is that only the column headings seem to be sign-
| translated. Even if it lets some people know that they click on
| the tourism or jobs or culture section of the website, the
| content within those pages doesn't seem to be sign-translated. So
| how does it really help anybody? Hell, can you even get to this
| website in the first place if you can't read?
|
| And I don't know how Columbia's Internet works, but if you can
| read and aren't wealthy enough to afford fast Internet, maybe
| loading up videos while trying to browse the site makes the site
| slower and a worse experience for everybody.
|
| Perhaps the sentiment behind this is noble, and as an experiment
| it sure is interesting, but I'm not convinced that it really
| helps as is yet. Maybe this is a foundation for something more
| interesting down the road, but we'll see.
|
| PS: As a side note, while I can't read the content, the site
| itself looks pretty visually interesting and well-done.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Hypothetically anything could be government waste, but adding a
| little accessibility feature doesn't seem like a huge project,
| right? They have to hire a translator for an afternoon, and
| then embed some videos into their site.
|
| And if they have the virtue of supporting accessibility, why
| shouldn't they signal that? It seems like it would be helpful
| info, if you were deaf and thinking of visiting, to know that
| the local government was at least trying. I mean hypothetically
| they could be lying, but in that case the issue still isn't
| virtual signaling, it would just be the lie.
| xienze wrote:
| > but the reason that this feels like a combination of
| government-waste and possibly virtue-signaling
|
| I've felt this same way about all these government press
| conferences that have a picture-in-picture of someone doing
| sign language translation. I genuinely don't understand the
| point apart from virtue signaling. Why not just use live
| transcription? I can't imagine that we don't have the tech to
| do a good job of it now, in real time, or close enough.
| richbell wrote:
| > I've felt this same way about all these government press
| conferences that have a picture-in-picture of someone doing
| sign language translation. I genuinely don't understand the
| point apart from virtue signaling. Why not just use live
| transcription?
|
| I understand why you might feel this way, so let me try to
| explain.
|
| Sign languages are a completely different modality/type of
| language than written and spoken languages. For example,
| American Sign Language (ASL) is _completely unrelated_ to
| written and spoken English, and conveying a message between
| languages is often complicated and requires someone to
| actively interpret -- it 's more of an art than a science. So
| while Closed Captioning was a huge step forward for making
| things accessible to deaf and hard-of-hearing people, it's
| still a subpar method of communication because for deaf
| people, especially deaf immigrants, written English is often
| their 2nd/3rd/4th language. When you are communicating
| important information where comprehension is essential, you
| *need* an interpreter.
| logicalmonster wrote:
| > American Sign Language (ASL) is completely unrelated to
| written and spoken English
|
| Do you have any resources that could explain this different
| more fully?
| MrDrone wrote:
| This parent-commenter is correct, ASL is a completely
| separate language from spoken English. Many people who
| are raised with ASL as their first language prefer seeing
| ASL rather than reading English.
|
| Modern ASL includes elements of "signed English" but it
| it's own language, the third most common in the US.
|
| I am a hearing person, so take my understanding of this
| with a grain of salt. Here is a Deaf primary resource to
| describe the difference.
|
| https://www.lifeprint.com/asl101/topics/history8.htm
| MrDrone wrote:
| This is absolutely correct. ASL is so deeply different from
| English that in certain circumstances where it's a priority
| that a signer's understanding of the topic is clear there
| can be two interpreters at once. A hearing interpreter who
| interprets verbatim to a Deaf interpreter (a CDI, or
| certified Deaf interpreter) who then interprets to the Deaf
| recipient.
|
| Public broadcasts should absolutely be interpreted to
| ensure that everyone has access to understanding them.
|
| I encourage everyone to learn more about ASL and to learn a
| bit of ASL themselves. There are many amazing resources put
| out by Deaf people to help folks learn.
| richbell wrote:
| > A hearing interpreter who interprets verbatim to a Deaf
| interpreter (a CDI, or certified Deaf interpreter) who
| then interprets to the Deaf recipient.
|
| This is a fantastic point. Learning about CDIs really
| helped me understand the chasm between written and spoken
| languages versus sign languages.
|
| For example, writing a program that leverages NLP to
| provide real-time captioning doesn't necessarily make the
| content as accessible as you'd think.
| logicalmonster wrote:
| I think the best argument for having government press
| conferences with a video of somebody doing sign language is
| that it underscores that something might be a super serious
| situation that literally _everybody_ needs to know about as a
| matter of immediate life and death and it would get peoples '
| attention who might not otherwise notice that something was
| serious. That benefit is arguably nullified though when every
| press conference has them.
|
| Personally speaking though, I'm against using them in about
| 99.999% of situations that are not imminent life and death
| emergencies. The gesturers' motions can be super distracting
| to the point that it makes the normal political process
| harder to focus on. It's just distracting enough (IMO) that
| important details about the normal everyday government
| business can be missed.
| richbell wrote:
| > That benefit is arguably nullified though when every
| press conference has them... Personally speaking though,
| I'm against using them in about 99.999% of situations that
| are not imminent life and death emergencies.
|
| The benefit is including deaf people, not just making sure
| that they're able to comprehend emergency alerts (though
| that is also important). While I agree that the system
| could be refined, another part of me likes it because it
| gives visibility to something that the vast majority of
| hearing people wouldn't know about otherwise.
|
| Anecdotally, my partner's parents can read and write
| English but aren't fluent in it. The prevalence of
| interpreters in the past few years has made things
| accessible to them that wouldn't have been in the past.
| From what I've heard, they aren't alone in their
| experience.
| hjdhdfjfhfhg wrote:
| yreg wrote:
| I don't understand what you are saying at all. Care to
| elaborate in a less passive-aggressive way?
| jen729w wrote:
| > Columbia's
|
| Colombia.
|
| I correct this at 80% of coffee shops I go to. Yeah, I'm that
| guy.
|
| I went to Colombia in the early 2000s and _adored_ it (I'm
| British), so this gets my goat.
| IncRnd wrote:
| Hover over one of the sign-language symbols and see video of a
| person signing to provide information.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-02 23:01 UTC)