Re: Proposal for a mailing list to improve Debian translation
"Thomas T. Dorsey" wrote:
> From: "Christian Couder" <email@example.com>
> > There is a difference between internationalization (i18n) and
> > translation (l10n).
> > Internationalization is supposed to make it possible to translate things
> > (like an app using gettext or a web site using content negotiation).
> > Translation is making some translation available for the things that
> > have been internationalized.
> Sometimes, it is really not that simple when you start playing with MBCS,
> right to left writing (Arabic), or even something like top to bottom then
> right to left MBCS (a traditional writing style in some Asian coutries.)
> (Mostly for those that
> Internationalization (I18N), in its simplified meaning, is a combination of
> methods to design and implement an application or system to theoretically
> support any possible language. An i18n application must be able to support
> all the languages supported by the operating system and/or libraries, even
> if it may operate awkwardly.
> Localization (L10N), is a process to make an application or system to
> support a locale (both language and location) that is not currently
> supported. In supporting the locale, the application or system will usually
> be changed to not only support the language, but to also to support the
> local "customs". These customs may be simple as just changing the shortcut
> assignments, but may go as far as making major locale specific application
> modifications or additions. A well designed i18n application will easily
> support the new language and key assignments, but the modification and
> additions are usually only possible at the l10n stage. Although it is
> ideal, a l10n application does not necesarily have to be an i18n
> application. The translation of the documentation is also an import part
> that is dealt with durring l10n.
> Translation (T9N?), is the process of translating the language. Usually the
> term translation is used to specify a stage of the l10n process, but for
> some locales the translation stage may be the only stage required for the
> entire l10n process.
Your explanation is very good. Thanks.
> Out of these processes, the i18n process is the most important. With good
> i18n support, the l10n process of complex languages (ie. Chinese, Japanese,
> Vietnamese, Korean) is greatly simplified (ask anyone else that did l10n
> work in one of these languages). Without i18n support the effort put into
> the l10n process may even justify a code fork (happened very frequently in
> the past).
> I support the creation of a deban-l10n for discussion of general l10n
> issues. It may be better discussing alot of this in the i18n list, but I
> think it would be very useful for those that are trying to get help in l10n
> issues for a certain language or a set of languages they want to support.
> Maybe creating a l10n list for every language may be an option, but that
> might be a little overkill. ;-)
Thanks for your support.
There are already some debian-l10n-xxxx for different langages (french,
dutch, portuguese, spanish).
> > So if we want to talk about translation in the i18n list, we should at
> > least change the description of the i18n list.
> > For example we could change it to "Internationalization (i18n) and
> > translation (l10n) of the distribution are discussed here."
> This also sounds good to me.
> > And currently there is one low traffic "debian-i18n" list and many
> > "debian-l10n-xxxxxx" lists with higher traffic. So in my opinion, people
> > are more interested in discussing translation than internationalisation.
> > So it would be better anyway to change the name of the i18n list (if we
> > don't want 2 lists).
> I think we should keep the i18n list either way since l10n and i18n are
> linked, but separate issues.
Ok. So as you and Tomohiro Kubota seem to prefer two different lists, I
go back to my first proposal.
I will ask for a new list called "debian-l10n". (Well, if no other
people make me change my mind again.)