On 12/14/2014 09:19 AM, Khaled Hosny wrote: ...
But that was not my point, I was complaining about people who think that consistency, following linguistic rules and proper typography are usless cosmetics. Regardless of how localisation will be done or what language is
...
Then you completely misunderstood the point of localisers, and defeated a strawman.
It's commendable to strive for proper typography in the source etc.
But the translation may have had the proper typography (for its language context) first time, couldn't it?
However, localisers (why did you quote the term, anyway?) have to redo the work already (properly) done, repeatedly. Reviewing and approving 1k of strings isn't peanuts, whatever one may think.
To put it into context assuredly familiar to you - how would you like to have to redo from scratch one specific curve in the font, verbatim, several times? Would it strike you as a not quite an optimal way to spend the time you dedicate to open projects?
And I have yet to see those technical marvels we've been promised will compensate for this problem (promised with lot of eff-ing at silly localisers, by the way).
Yury -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: l10n+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
