Re: Menu system rewrite update (Aug 6 2002)
On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 02:23:43PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
[...]
> > Also I would like an extra tag, say X-Debian-LozalizedFields, which should
> > contain the exact list of translatable entries when either
> > a) a "localestring" entry must not be translated
> > b) or another entry has to be translated
>
> Why? Every field that is localestring is fair game for translation;
> however, it's up to logic to decide whether translating particular
> entries should be done or not. (e.g. "Mozilla" probably should not be
> translated, but "Web Browser" should be.)
>
> In some cases, transliteration may be appropriate even if translation
> is not; for example, I'm sure Mozilla can be transliterated into
> Cyrillic and one of the Japanese alphabets (katakana? I never learned
> the names of them), but I'm not sure it needs *translation* per se.
> But that should be left to the judgment of translators IMO.
So hear a translator's voice :)
We need automatically generated stats to know which packages to work on.
See
http://www2.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard/po/registry.cgi?team=fr
http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gtp/status/gnome-2.0-core/
http://www.debian.org/devel/website/stats/
http://www.debian.org/intl/l10n/templates/
http://www.debian.org/intl/l10n/po/
etc. There used to be similar stats at http://i18n.kde.org/ but
it is currently unavailable.
I disagree with you when you say "it's up to logic to decide whether
translating particular entries should be done or not", because it
prevents accurate automatically generated stats.
Consider a .desktop file in which maintainer adds a non-standard
translatable entry. There is few chance translators catch it if
this file is already marked 100% translated. OTOH if Mozilla's
maintainer refuses to include
Name[xx]=Mozilla
in order to save lots of space, mozilla.desktop will never reach
100% and translators will submit patches. If you think I am
paranoid, have a look at http://people.debian.org/~branden/#debconf ;)
There is nothing personal here against Branden, the problem is that
Debconf does not provide a machinery similar to the
X-Debian-LozalizedFields I would like to see adopted.
Denis
Reply to: