ubuntu-manual team mailing list archive

[Patrick Dickey <pdickeybeta@xxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/22/2010 02:50 PM, Redmar wrote:
> Khaled Hosny schreef op wo 22-12-2010 om 22:35 [+0200]:
>> On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 06:51:15PM +0100, Ask Hjorth Larsen wrote:
>>> My opinion on what we need technically:
>>>
>>> Fuzzy matching and a word-wise po-file diffing utility.
>>
>> Lunchpad developers seem not to think that translators effort and
>> resources is worthy saving, this is not the first time this issue is
>> brought up. All what I got last time was some, more time consuming,
>> workarounds, so I just gave up; I only start translating just before the
>> translation deadline even if it means some translations might not make
>> it into the release, as I value my, very limited, time and resources.
>>
>> Regards,
>>  Khaled
>>
> 
> Offline tools are can be used to merge two po files and mark strings
> that are not completely similar as 'fuzzy'. I will try if I can get this
> to work for the Dutch e1 and e2, and post the procedure to the list once
> I get it right.
> 
> Greets,
> Redmar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual
> Post to     : ubuntu-manual@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Could LP be set up in such a way that instead of throwing out the
original translation, it flags the new version as being different, and
subject to a review before it's posted for the translators?

I realize that this would require time for a person to review the
paragraphs and decide whether the old translation should be tossed or
not.  I would think a combination of this, along with the offline tools
would be a good solution.

The theory I have is this (and honestly I don't know if it would work).
 The author/editor uploads their file. LP checks it against the
original, and if it's different enough that LP would toss out the
original translation, it flags the files (original and new).  The
reviewer (or translator) would run them through the offline tools, and
hopefully get a translated version, where the new text isn't translated.
 Then they would just have to translate the new (or changed) portions,
instead of the entire thing.

I'm new to this, so I'm probably just restating what everyone else is
saying.  But hopefully this gives another look at the idea, and maybe
helps to come up with a workable solution or procedure for the problem.

Also it should be noted that the Kubuntu team is running into similar
issues with LP and the translation system (for the actual packages), and
they've all but given up on using it.  They too are looking for an
alternative that will work.  So maybe this should be an impetus for LP
to fix the problems (the fact that two groups are looking to defect from
the system).

Have a great day, and Happy Holidays. :)
Patrick.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk0Snp8ACgkQMp6rvjb3CATXgACdEqQAyxdAm9z2ShOvjFYs+KMz
XJ0An1vZJoTG1MyLY0ixjdnUB6iMqZbU
=y2gm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----