Re: wgo i18n

(CCing Danilo, who might be quite idle these days since he is in the
Ubuntu Mountain View summit)

The i18n team should update, sort and make more specific their wishlist
at . In the meantime I'll
try to help clearing the way.

On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 01:43 +0100, Ramon Navarro Bosch wrote:
> The exact question is on :
> which is the best way to work for translators ?
> * Whould you like to use both ( XML export / import  and LinguaPlone
> translation interface ? )

All content will be translated via XML export / import. No translations
will be done directly in the Plone web interface.  

> * Which XML format is needed to be usefull for i18n team ?

Ideally po files, or a format xml2po can digest perfectly -

> * It's ok webdav interface for editing it ?

Mmm I'll leave this one to the translation team. Now they need to
operate with a CVS for apps/docs translations. They either: 1) use their
cvs checkout to generate an up to date po and work on it, 2) download
the latest po from l10n-status.g.o and work on it, then commit (directly
or via a human proxy). I guess webdav is not that different from 2)

> * Can we define the exact workflow to use on translations ?

I'll also leave the details of this one. We should aim to integrate as
much as possible with (aka ) and the workflows they have
defined there.

Some tips while the translators define their requirements/wishlist:

- Translators love stats like They help them catch the
remaining work and go for it.

- Maybe it would be useful to have notifications of new/updated
translatable content to be sent to a mailing list (or the lists of each

- FWIW, well supported languages have a reviewing process of the
translations committed done by the language coordinators. Languages not
that well supported have their translations committed directly.

- It would be useful to have at least 2 priority levels: pages that MUST
be translated and updated (most if not all the static pages) and
news-alike pages (i.e. case studies, gnome products...) 

- We need to define when a language becomes publicly available (i.e.
having >95% of priority pages and >50% of the rest. Maybe it's worth to
offer some kind of non-supported visibility to the languages with lower
levels of translation? Perhaps this would help them get more

> On this part we will probably need some new code to adapt and I would
> like to know how much work is needed to estimate how many help we will need.

I believe the tough bone is the integration with Damned Lies. If this is
achieved... translators shouldn't care if the source texts are in a CVS
or a CMS.

Quim Gil ///

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]