Ok sounds good - I'll leave it as SIS then. On Aug 11, 2014 10:32 AM, "Adam Estrada" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm with Martin on this. The term GIS is starting to sound outdated > and SIS makes perfect sense as the scope of this project is pretty > broad. > > Adam > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Martin Desruisseaux > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Christina > > > > About "SIS" versus "GIS", of course we do not plan to change the whole > > thing to "GIS". I think that "GIS" is kind of old acronym. For example > > "Open Geospatial Consortium" was "OpenGIS" before they changed their > > name. Maybe "Spatial" is considered of wider scope than "Geographic" > > since "Geo" means "Earth", while "spatial" could be an other planet, or > > even a city on Earth but without paying attention to where on Earth is > > the city (e.g. going no further than where on the street is a building). > > > > I think we could replace occurrences of "GIS" by "SIS" in order to > > simplify the text. > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > Le 09/08/14 00:55, Christina Hough a écrit : > >> Thanks for the edits Martin! My only question is about SIG vs GIS: looks > >> like the website has it as Spatial Information System. Are you going to > >> change the whole thing to Geographic Information System? I’m happy to > >> update my translation in that case, and you’d know better than me which > >> term is more appropriate. > >> > >> I’m keeping notes of any lines that I’d particularly like someone to > check, > >> but as you can see, a quick proof-read by someone with better technical > >> knowledge than me would be helpful! > >> > >> Adam, I tried a few paragraphs in Google Translate, and it’s not bad at > >> all. Actually, it’s just made me think of an alternate and maybe better > >> translation for at least one term! Bits of it might be hard to decode > >> without referring to the original French, though (“a part” came out as > “a > >> game," for example). I think running the documentation through Google > >> translate and then going through and cleaning it up would be a fairly > >> viable approach, but I don’t think it would take me less time than going > >> through the French as I’ve been doing. In fact, I think that my lack of > >> subject-matter knowledge slows me down on the Google translations, much > >> more so than it does with the original French. I’ll keep it in mind as a > >> resource though, and if anyone wants to tackle some of the translating > via > >> Google, I’m happy to coordinate with them. I think a user of these > systems > >> might be in a better position to decode some of Google Translate’s > >> ambiguities than I am. > > >
