Somehow the mail client ate most of my email, reposting, sorry...


---


Sorry for the delay in responding, Im travelling.


I think I disagree with most things that have been said in this discussion so 
far.


Let me try and go through them one by one...


1) Orthography


Terrible reason to turn down a project. Most l10n projects LO has involve 
languages where spellling is a potentially contentious issue. Perhaps the 
really big locales have very settled spelling systems but even they are not 
immune. For example, I doubt that anyone is enforcing either pre or post 
spelling reform spellings in the German project. Some locales actually 
deliberately use l10n to help standardize spelling.


2) Team size


Errr no. 1 dedicated locaizer is more than enough. I have a day job and I also 
do virtually all the l10n work on Mozilla, LO, WorPress (both), VLC, and 
several other projects. In fact, a single localizer can be more effective in 
some instances provided they put in sufficient time and effort. In fact having 
a team for Scottish Gaelic initially would have been a hindrance, not a help 
because there would have been ENDLESS debates around terminology and spelling. 
In a non-standardized language, a single translator can produce translations 
which are superior than those of a team, provided they are fluent and generally 
good with technology.


3) Its extinct or critically endangered
Well, so is Scottish Gaelic, less than 60k speakers is hardly a stadium full of 
people... l10n is a key part of any revitalization effort in a society which is 
not cut off from technology. It is perhaps the one way in which a marginalized 
language can gain a foothold on the screens of the next generation, small as it 
may be. A program with a UI in a marginalized language has a big wow factor if 
done well. If you localize Diablo III into German, people just expect that, its 
not news. Translate it into Nipmuck and itll be all over the airwaves.


Wikipedia or even Ethnologue are not the pinnacle of information when it comes 
to smaller languages. On several occasions have I come across languages marked 
as extinct in one, but not the other or vice versa or even where both were 
simply wrong. For example, they had a Basque Creole lumped in with a Romani 
language code in once instance.


4) Better to translate literature


Yes and no. Im a very good localizer but Im totally useless at translating 
literature or poetry or songs. Its called a specialism, no translator worth 
their money translate EVERYTHING. Id be equally useless at writing 
non-technical content.


5) Start with documentation/help

No.It would raise the wrong expectations, if you give the average user a screen 
that says Filte, unless highly cynical, they would expect the rest in the same 
lingo too.


As to the Help, who reads the Help? Ever? Unless they dont have web access. 
Even if some folk use it, its the worst starting point and a soul-destroying 
task.


6) Professors say to prioritise proofing


Maybe but that depends on the locale. To create a spellchecker you first need 
either really good dictionary or ody of well spelled texts, plus someone who 
can do code to some extent because doing a Hunspell package is not entirely 
straight forward. Grammar checkers are equally nice but not a priority to begin 
with I would say. Small languages often have not codified their grammar fully 
and thus if you just write some rules, youll just annoy everybody.


In the end, these are just opinions. They are neither uniform (I disagree for 
one) not are they based on research.


7) Firefox


That is actually the best alternative suggestion Ive heard in this debate. It 
might make sense to look into that. But either way, LO and Firefox are both 
must-haves really so it doesnt make that much of a difference which one you 
start with. Firefox, since it has Android and iOS versions now, would get you 
more bang for your buck faster though to begin with


8) Machine Translation


Worst idea ever. MT relies on massive bilingual corpora - and thats just the 
start of the headaches. The last thing a language like Nipmuck needs is a MT 
system that cost them huge resources to produce and which outputs 
semi-gibberish at best. Irish is in a much better position regarding 
English/Irish data and yet Google Translate produces Irish which either makes 
you laugh yourself silly or makes you cry.
Long story short, my view is, welcome to both, just have a moment to consider 
the implications regarding time/effort/other challenges and if you still think 
its a good idea, good on you.


Michael


-- 
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

Reply via email to