Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

WOW, this is a big reply. Sorry.

I think you may be misinterpreting most if not all of my comments.

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Sophie Gautier
<> wrote:
Le 2010-11-22 21:10, Michael Wheatland a écrit :

1. Localisation teams will still exist in an ecosystem along side the
development, design, marketing groups.
All communications in these groups will be in native languages, but
others can also contribute to them using auto-translations.
Not ideal, but we don't have enough translators to get them to
translate every conversation on the site.

This is where you are mistaken, this is not about localization, it's about
native language. No localization in these groups is needed concerning their
work on their sites. No Google translation, no Drupal translation, no Pootle

Sorry, I meant local (native language teams). I understand that there
is no need for translations, however there are a lot of discussions on
these lists which would be useful to share, so why shouldn't the
community have translation available for people outside of a native
language group? I am confused by your flat out refusal for the
community to become more transparent and inclusive. Can you clarify

2. As mentioned before the main site will be structured the same way
for all languages. English is not the default translate to-from
language, it is the simply the fallback if a translation is not

No, each language will structure their site as they want. And English is not
a fall back. If the page doesn't exist in the given language of the site, it
doesn't exist at all on any the site.

I think you may be confusing the Silverstripe site with the Drupal
site. In Drupal each native language team can customise their 'native
language' section, but the structure of the main site remains
consistent across languages for quality control reasons.
The layout and structure of the Drupal site remains constant across
languages, but language specific content can be added to individual
pages if required.
As I understand it 'international english' is the primary
communication language of the project, so why would we prefer users be
presented with a 404 error rather than the LibreOffice official
default language version if a specific page has not yet been
translated for their native language?

As I understand it this has been the biggest problem with the
Silverstripe site to date. It seems to be coming along well, but there
is no underlying structure that spans languages. Refer to the
marketing conference call.
Common structure in the main site is very important to ensure that no
languages are second class citizens, especially for common downloads
such as templates and extensions as well as support options.

All that follows looks to be misinterpreted due to this assumption.

ie. if someone in china accesses a page originally written in french
with no other translations available it will display in french.

It's completely stupid, sorry for that. The content of this page may have
absolutely no relevance for the Chinese Group, why should they have our shop
pages displayed. Another example, why should you display the German page
about their Box? it only is relevant for the German Group. Each language
group has its own life and is not shared by the others every time. We are
not cloned.

If an english translation is available it will display in english.

And it's not acceptable for a sake of quality. It will give a very poor
image of our groups.

I am referring to the main site, not the native language groups.
Again, I think misinterpreted due to the mixup between structure in
Drupal as opposed to Silverstripe.
We hope that all translations will be available, if this is the case
you will only see native language.

 If there

is a chinese translation available it will display in chinese.

Really irrelevant.

It means that there is a fall back for the fall back. It means people
will never get a 404 error instead of content.
Yes, this is irrelevant in the Silverstripe site as there is no
structure consistency across languages, but in Drupal it is critically
important for the main site to avoid '404 Page not found'. (does not
apply to native language areas)

In terms of the Q&A section, I would expect that there will be a
knowledge base of manually translated questions and answers along side
an ad-hoc section which would be automatically translated. Quality
ad-hoc questions when answered could be moved to the knowledge base
section then manually translated for accuracy. The concept is fluid at
the moment, so if you would like to see any other features please let
us know.

Again, the QA team are used to work together, so don't put constraints where
they are not needed.

Not QA, Q&A Questions and Answers, not Quality Assurance.
Not sure what constraints you were referring to, but we have not
finished consulting with the quality assurance group yet.
They seem pretty happy with what we are doing so far.

Currently, all this has my absolute veto.

Each steering committee member has veto power?  I was not aware of that.
If this is the case we must have implemented bylaws. Can you tell me
where to find them?

Kind regards

Can I suggest that you contact me directly if you are confused about
any of these clarifications of clarifications.

There has already been a lot of consultation and very good work done
by a lot of people on this on the advice of the steering committee
decision for a rapid start Silverstripe site followed by a fully
functioning Drupal community site.
All of the work so far has been observed by Florian out Steering
Committee representative whom has given nothing but positive feedback,
and I must say I am very proud of the efforts of the large and growing
Drupal website team.

The Drupal path forward and structure was published about a month ago
on the Website section of the wiki with very positive feedback.

Michael Wheatland

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


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.