Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index



On 2011-03-04 09:14, Yury Tarasievich wrote:
Also, I still can't readily find on LO sites the authoritative description of the .PO based L10N process. Pootle isn't acceptable for the languages with the comparatively weak terminological base . In such cases it's common for everybody to translate "just as one sees fit". Sasha's contribution on Pootle is already deviating from the terminology used in the existing Belarusian translation.
We have many African languages who also have weak terminology that benefit from using Pootle.

The difference is that they include their terminology in the terminology project on Pootle. You can do that also, in which case people giving suggestions and translations are guided by the teams terminology lists.

I'd say Pootle in that case is a better way to localise since the terminology is central and available to everyone. I'm not trying to convince you to change anything, I just think that that specific criticism on Pootle is not well informed.

--
Dwayne

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to l10n+help@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/l10n/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.