Hello, > I am currently doing QA using Sun specifications, but no idea about > any useful tool to do all the work. I have been testing Pootle and > Okapi framework to build some test applications, but I'm afraid there > is a lot of work to be done. Indeed I am doing some collaborative work with Pootle, trying to come up with a unified data store. This simple application is based on the new data store. We would be very interested in your feedback. > I think that the best path is to provide some kind of workflow control > on the translation. Current po file format is not very good about it, > but xliff is designed with this in mind. Indeed, I am trying to accommodate advanced XLIFF features in the new translation store (and to try to shove it into standard .po files too). > Reporting errors manually actually seems the best way to get a decent > translation but I would like to have a tool to assist translators in > their job. Sure thing. If you have more concrete ideas, let me know. > Also another idea I have been working is about comparing similar > translations, which is a key point about giving feedback from revisors > to translators, so they can be always informed about their translation > errors. I think Pootle currently has checkers and a compendium. These could probably be used to implement what you suggest. > I'm afraid that your announce made me to think you were working on > this issues. That's fine, it's my own fault I mentioned QA. Besides, it was interesting to look up terms you mentioned (I did understand that it was not mumbo-jumbo). Actually, I am somewhat interested in the serious translation QA processes and any possible software support for them, but I found it difficult to find any concrete, useful information about them on the web. -- Gintautas Miliauskas http://gintasm.blogspot.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature