On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 04:44:57AM +0200, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > This would be better alone, but doesn't fit with the rest of the > > sentence: > > > > "As a last resort, if you don't receive any offers for a few weeks > > after registering, you can send e-mail to" > > > > Here, "don't receive any offers for a few weeks" would imply that > > after a few weeks, you *do* receive some offers. > > > > I'd go with "haven't received". Inevitably, then the sentence doesn't > > flow very well, so we shuffle it around a bit like this (and fix > > another bug in the parenthesised expression at the end): > > > > "A few weeks after registering, if you still haven't received any > > offers, then you can send e-mail to <email gpg-coord@nm.debian.org> > > telling them precisely where you live (give the names of some big > > cities close to you)." > > When ever there is a complex explanation for a simple thing like this, > we should look into the logic structure of the whole process before > tweaking wordings of each to make it look good and smooth. Well, it's not all that complicated - I ran through in a page or three what would usually take about half a second, for the sake of example. The paragraph does kinda suck, though. > Let's get this simplified. > > There are few approaches to get one's GPG key signed. > > 1. Passive action by looking for GPG signing party information. If > found one you can attend, go there to get GPG key signed. > 2. Active search for willing victims (GPG coordination page). Contact > by mail. > 3. Brute search for victims by location such as coordinate or city name. > ... > 4. Think other creative but quiet ways and try them. ... > 5. Cry out loud to mailing list (after checking with AM). > 6. Discuss with NM-front desk for alternatives. > > I think "How to get your GPG key signed" should consists of <ol> of > above items with nicely styled English words with much detailed > explanation(s). I do not like current logic structure which uses > paragraphs and <ul> in a mixed way. > > I think that the less we rely on subtle wordings, the more accurate we > get across all translated forms. Same idea occurred to me. I was half-inclined to rewrite it like this, but couldn't be bothered; I just don't care *that* much. As for accuracy across translations, I'm not sure it's feasible. Admittedly English <-> Japanese is a pathological case, but it does form a good example of just how fiendishly difficult accurate translation can be (unless you give in and expand every sentence to an explanatory paragraph - which isn't the desired result). -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
pgpoIZcPPSC9M.pgp
Description: PGP signature