[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: news about debian-women wiki

Hash: SHA1

Le 30/05/2010 13:17, Francesca a écrit :
> I think the wording proposition from David it's ok: I only added some
> words about todo stuff. :D

Thanks, just added it at the end of current "Other news" stuff. It would
be nice if someone else could confirm it's fine to add this (and
proofread it, thus the cross post with debian-l10n-english@l.d.o). I
wonder if there are not too much "the", and if the invitation wouldn't
be better in "active voice" the way debconf templates are (supposed to
be) written:

[links are removed in order to make review easier]

- ------------ new stuff -------------

Ana Guerrero announced that the migration of the Debian-Women wiki into
the Debian wiki is now complete. There is still a little bit of work to
do: if you want to contribute, take a look at the migration TODO list.

- ------------------------------------

Another proposition for the last phrase:

"contribution are welcome, accordingly to the migration TODO list"

> Il 30/05/2010 16:52, David Prévot ha scritto:

>> I think it's an error
>> to link something from a verb [1] (for accessibility purpose: the user
>> is supposed to be linked from a meaningful non verbal phrase, since the
>> link is not doing any action). I use to act this way in the French
>> translation, is it fine if I modify existing links in the DPN to fit
>> this usage?
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/noClickHere
> You're right, David! It seems more correct to not use a verb as a label
> for a link.

Just updated the links accordingly, thanks in advance for reviews.

> Besides some verbs are neologism and we can't provide a good
> translation: e.g. "blogged" not exists in italian, I have to use a
> phrase, instead (as in "he wrote in his blog" for " he blogged") so the
> label for the link become a phrase...

Actually, it's the same in French, but I usually find it nice, since we
can just use the label "blog" as a link, which is usually fine.



Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: