[Scilab-loc] Re: Settings for the scilab localization in LaunchPad Translations

[Kenneth Nielsen]

2011/5/6 Yuri Chornoivan <yurchor at ukr.net>:
>> 2011/5/5 Ihor Rokach <[hidden email]>:
>>  > Yuri,
>>  >
>>  > I agree with you totally. Most of the Open Source translation projects
>>  > were, are and will be the one-man ones.
>>
>>  Joining a team in a gathering group like Launchpad translators, will
>>  (if you get the team of the ground) allow you to get help with the
>>  proofreading, turning it into an at least 2 man job. I have
>>  contributed to jmol, rednotebook, Ubuntu Pay and others in this way me
>>  translating and someone else proofreading or the other way around and
>>  it works just fine.
> I am KDE and Fedora coordinator and Opera Software official volunteer
> translator. For sure, I cannot understand what prevents you from doing this
> now. Just call your reviewers and they correct the mistakes.
>
> Do you want to ban some "bad" guys that ruined your translations? That is
> easy, file a question on LP. ;)

Not a bad guy, but simply one that isn't as good at grammar and yes I
want to do that and no it isn't easy. To ensure that the translations
I did had proofread etc. and were thorough with, keeps being that way,
then I will have to continuously scan all my old translations for bad
contributions, then correct them back, maybe try and contact the bad
contributor by email to make sure that he wont keep making the same
bad suggestions and if he wont respond what? Eventually file a
questions in LP and ask to have him banned from translation? That's
easy?

>>  > Idea of creation of so called
>>  > 'translation groups'  maybe could be useful for some projects,
>>  > however, is totally senseless in the Scilab case. Actually it adds
>>  > nothing to the quality of translation of Scilab or even decrease it
>>  > because it kills effort of causal translators which help us by
>>  > correction of one or two strings only.
>>
>>  You can't do proper QA by a casual effort.
>
> Why? I believe that not all of us are professionals in translation. Why
> casual reviewer (we are all casual reviewers) cannot fix casual translator
> (do not tell me that you will leave forever and translate Scilab to the end
> of times)?

I did not mean casual as supposed to professional. I was referring to
the case described _just_ above, about someone casually dropping by
and fixing a couple of errors in the translations.

>>  > These people need to have easy
>>  > and simple access to the translation interface, otherwise they simply
>>  > will not participate in the translation process.
>>
>>  Making translations something that you can contribute to with this
>>  kind of hit-and-run contributions is a huge mistake. I don't know who
>>  ever came up with that idea but it is horrible. Translations, just
>>  like programming or documentations writing, requires a little more
>>  effort that that to do it right. That was the way the Launchpad
>>  started out and they have now realized that effect that has on quality
>>  and therefore now, still allow it, but recommends restrictions after
>>  the upstart phase
>>
> Well, who can judge who are right 3 Ubuntu translators or 3 KDE translators?
>
> There are no conflicts between Scilab translators. We were working together
> to make the translations better. But then someone find that we should not
> give the opportunity to the new translators and reviewers and it appears
> that there are groups of translators (lp-translators) that know things
> better but did not translate Scilab because of the wrong rules


All I can tell you is that a decision has been made to restrict access
to translations to pretty much all major free software projects (a lot
more that 3 translators). And yes, giving people the options to
implement QA properly in the translations did play a role in those
decisions.

>>  > I know examples of the projects with completely restrict-less access
>>  > to the translation interface which are extremely successful. See for
>>  > example SMath Studio (freeware Mathcad clone) translation interface at
>>  >
>>  > http://smath.info/translator/
>>
>>  Success in terms of what? Quantity I'll believe, quality, not likely.
>
> Can you give an example of the faulty translation?

I see bad suggestions all the time. Luckily the are in translations
the are restricted so they did not just get implemented directly. You
want me to find you a couple of suggestions and explain to you why
they are bad Danish translations?

Regards Kenneth