On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:05:01 +0200, chals <chals@altorricon.com> wrote: [...] > Now, if you follow the mailing list you will see that there are other > people/teams working on the manual. It is (and I quote here from the > manual itself): > > "This manual is intended as a community project and all proposals for > improvements and contributions are extremely welcome. The preferred > way to submit a contribution is to send it to the mailing list." I know. ;-) > > About this point, what do you think of using the > > debian-l10n-portuguese mailing list to coordinate translation and > > revision efforts of of this manual? > > This is a great idea. Let me just comment that since I hold no > authority whatsoever over it I leave the decision up to Willer. Of course. > I can only give my personal opinion based on my experience and my > knowledge: > > Translating is about making choices. Translators have to make choices > all the time and sometimes the choices are better made by a language > expert and sometimes the choices are better made by a person who knows > what the software is about. > > This means that sometimes it is better to work as a freelance and > sometimes it is better to work in a team. It is hard to evaluate as > everything in life has advantages and disadvantages. Ideally, a well > done job would combine both parts (the individual and the team). I agree too. I just was worried because I was knowing by chance he was translating the manual and as nobody else knew about, it probably would be without proofreading. > > Please, I'm not asking you to stop using debian-live mailing list, > > but I mainly think to have a proper proofreading the > > debian-l10n-portuguese would be the most recommended place. > > I am in for your initiative but as commented before, there will be > occasions in which a single mail to debian-live mailing list will be > worth a million mails to debian-l10n-portuguese for the reasons stated > above. Very often only those who know what the software is all about > can provide the right answers. > > That said, let me congratulate you for the idea. Ideally all > translations should be proofread by the respective l10n groups. The > only requisite is that the translations have to be a) finished and b) > mature enough to be properly proofread (since they are constantly > changing and improving). > > There is another *little* drawback, and again this is just a personal > opinion. l10n groups usually give a low priority to manuals. These > groups tend to favour debconf templates and everything > installation/release related material, which is ok with me as it is > very understandable. But as a live-manual contributor, live-manual is > a little bit higher on my priorities. Although I prefer to translate manuals because we usually learn many things, It is fact that translation of manuals have a low priority for l10n teams. But I don't think because this he should assume nobody will be interested and proceed with translation without asking for help to the team at least for proofreading. Obviously this choice depends much more from him than the team. > Thank you very much. I really appreciate your ideas and comments. Thank you too. :-) Kind regards, -- Marcelo Santana (aka msantana) <marcgsantana@yahoo.com.br> http://blog.msantana.eng.br | http://identi.ca/mgsantana GnuPG fprint: 88FB 5D63 ED02 3B5D 90D6 3A3E 8698 1CC9 89C5 5467
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature