Il giorno gio, 22/12/2005 alle 15.07 -0200, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) ha scritto: > Sorry if I didn't phrase it properly (not native speaker). But > the idea of the feature is to be another helper tool, which means, fast > translations and "hints" during the translation process. But the human > reviewer _must_ be present for QA pourposes! Neither I am a native speaker, my mother tongue is Italian. Now I understand your point. > >> We could also think about a dict interface (it was suggested > >>in another thread) integrated, we can define the codes, abbreviations > >>and other itens that we are going to use. > > > > Do you mean adding an online dictionary for this thinks? This break the > > opportunity to work offline. > > No. The idea of the dictionary is becoming a central reference > for our codes (DWN, DSA, DAM, D-W) and also a common reference for all > l10n teams. We can release the files and you can feed a local dict > server with that. :o) > > It is not just a dict, it is also a common place to share this, > and it is a little bit off-topic for the i18n framework, it is another > helper tool and, IMHO, a very good reference for the entire Debian. OK this sound nice as I think offline work need to be considered for people who cannot connect for long time or don't want to work online. > >> We should also add some workflow requirements which could impact > >>the framework development. The most important part looks like is the > >>decision of the common format in the underlayer. But, I believe that > >>highlighting these points now could help us on taking decisions. > >>- - package descriptions > >> Are we able to work in the packages translations (for apt-like tools) > >> after a release? Or we should only work in sid? Could we integrate > >> this "automagically" in the framework? :) > > > > IIRC apt-* and aptitude where updated to support translated descriptions > > but the translated description were supported outside the package and > > the server with the translated description was never mirrored and now is > > offline or not serving files. (sorry for the orrible repetion). > > Yes, the support for Package Translations were added to some > apt-tools, but we still need to spread it, send it out to the mirrors > and the it integrated with the framework. There is another thread on the argument in this mailing list. Tests need to be done. > > >> I really don't know about the Copyright impacts in translations. We > >>should also be ready to track contributions and state clear the license > >>model of the translated contributions (if it already exists, sorry, I didn't > >>found it). :o) > > > > In the translation of program there is a clear place for last translator > > and copyright plate. > > Yes. But I don't know if we need to say that the contributions > became GNU/GPL or something else (I really don't know how important is > to state this clearly, I think it is important). I got your point. The workaround, for packages, is to state the translation have the same license of the original material. The problem could be with some documents' licenses. Regards Stefano PS: all cutted out parts were cutted becouse I agree with you. -- Stefano Canepa aka sc: sc@linux.it http://www.stefanocanepa.it Three great virtues of a programmer: laziness, impatience and hubris. Le tre grandi virtù di un programmatore: pigrizia, impazienza e arroganza. (Larry Wall)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part