Re: translating gnome-user-docs

[Milo Casagrande <milo_casagrande@xxxxxxxx>]

--- Bruno Patri <bruno.patri@xxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:

> 2007/9/12, Matthew East <mdke@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I'd like to ask people's opinions on something.
> >
> > In this release cycle Ubuntu has made some
> customisations to the
> > gnome-user-docs packages, in particular regarding
> the Gnome User Guide
> > and Gnome Accessibility Guide.
> >
> > The translations for these guides are maintained,
> in not too many
> > languages, by the upstream teams.
> >
> > My question involves the Ubuntu changes. Would
> people prefer to see
> > the templates for these uploaded to Rosetta as
> with ubuntu-docs, and
> > translate them there? The advantages are of course
> that it's more
> > convenient. The disadvantage is that commonly
> translators working on
> > ubuntu-docs make changes to the original markup
> which results in
> > invalidity and large amounts of work for me in
> importing and
> > correcting the translations.
> 
> I don't think this is a good idea to put these
> templates with
> ubuntu-docs. I've asked to members of French
> translation team to
> translate ONLY Ubuntu specific packages and
> encouraged them to be
> involved in upstream teams if they want to translate
> other application
> or documentation. It would be quite confusing if
> some GNOME
> documentation (wich isn't specific to ubuntu) comes
> with ubuntu-docs.

I don't see it as that bad idea.

I'm involved with GNOME upstream translations, but we
have few people contributing.

With the docs in Launchpad we can have a lot of people
working on this (Launchapd/Ubuntu attracts more people
than upstream, and very few of them "move" upstream).

And we could always msgcat Launchpad's po with GNOME's
one, so we can uplaod it even to GNOME (this is what
I'll do for my language).

Yes, there's the problem of invalidity in the docs,
but even with Ubuntu specific docs... but I can give
you a hand Matt, and I'm pleased to help here.


> > I think that if we include the pot templates in
> Rosetta, we'll see
> > translations for a lot more languages than before,
> but also we may see
> > some translations including validity errors. The
> alternative is to ask
> > translators to download the source code for the
> package and submit
> > their po files individually, like the workflow
> used by Gnome upstream.
> > I suspect that that might be an equal amount of
> work, what do you
> > think?

I think the amount of the work could be the same. If
they download only the po file, there's no easy way on
validating it, XML files are needed...

Cheers.



Milo Casagrande  <milo_casagrande@xxxxxxxx>


      ___________________________________ 
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html