Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Pootle engagement with Mozilla

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Dwayne Bailey <dwayne@translate.org.za> wrote:
> On 04/05/2012 09:55, khagaroth wrote:
> > tag/variable highlighting in the _translation_ not only in the source
>
> Nice, I also want that.  Not sure it is on our scope though.

Yes, this would be really helpful for LO, it is a real pain to
fix/translate the (xml based) help files without syntax highlighting.
Combined with the bad quality of the source xml (causing a lot of
false positives on the checks), I'm actually thinking if it wouldn't
be easier to translate the xml files directly using some xml editor
(and simultaneously fix the source).

> > and some more quality checks (especially consistency checks).
> We already have a lot of quality checks.  By consistency do you mean
> something like check that I have translated X as Y consistently?  We have
> tools for doing that offline, but online in Pootle :(
>
> I'm not sure how many people use the Terminology suggestion feature of
> Pootle? That helps a lot of teams maintain consistency.
>
> But back to checks.  If you have ideas for reducing false positives, new
> checks, or improving checks then please let us know.  They are not that hard
> to write but even if you can express them in a simple pseudo code taking
> source and target text then we can quite easily implement them.

Yes, that's what I mean with consistency checks. The external tool I
use does have two checks, one checking that a particular source has
always the same translation and the other, that one particular
translation is used only for one particular source.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to l10n+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted