Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Belarusian/Belorussian translation

On 2011-03-04 09:51, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
> 2011.03.04 09:14, Yury Tarasievich rašė:
> > Also, I still can't readily find on LO sites the authoritative 
> > description of the .PO based L10N process. 
>
> It's more-or-less outlined here: 
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Translation_for_3_3, except the 
> "Translators should use Pootle" part, which should have been worded 
> "Translators are suggested to use Pootle" or similarly.
>
> > 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.
>
> Dwayne has already mentioned why this particular criticism for Pootle 
> is incorrect. I'll add one more thing: the process of translating in 
> Pootle is quite flexible: the language admin can grant anyone 
> permissions to submit translations, or to suggest them. Say you don't 
> have a terminology file on hand, but you want to keep it consistent – 
> in that case you'd just give the team members the right to suggest, 
> and one or two reviewers to submit the suggested translations. That's 
> what a few teams already do, and it works pretty well.
>
> By the way, Pootle can even autogenerate a terminology file for you. 
> It would need a review, of course, but it would still be a huge step 
> forward.
Rimas I wonder if it would be worth actually creating a terminology file 
for LO?  Teams could still upload their own terms but this could act as 
an authoritative terminology list especially useful for teams starting 
out.  A team could be responsible for maintaining that as a resource.

--
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 ***