Re: [l10n-dev] cws readme31 and b and c = last minute edits
Hi Frank, really thank you for the detailed explanation. Sophie, changes in the Readme are very difficult to plan. They come in very late in the release schedule, if at all. In the Release Map for 3.1, I made sure to clearly have a deadline for last l10n bug fixes delivery: February 26th, 2009. This is the door I wanted to have opened for l10n fixes which may come as result out of l10n testing or some very latest and minimal changes, for example in the Readme. If you have any concerns about this procedure just let me know. Kind Regards, rafaella - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
Re: [l10n-dev] cws readme31 and b and c = last minute edits
Hi Frank, Frank Peters wrote: sophie schrieb: Could you check please that those 3 cws that have been created - on the 02/02 for oooreadme31 - today for oooreadme31b - today for oooreadme31c forget 31 and 31b they were created in error. 31c is the relevant CWS. Ok, and thank you for your fast answer. do not contain any changes relevant for translation. They are marked UI relevant in EIS with description : last Minute Readme edits, but I can't find any task attached to them. One is marked for SO the other one for OOo :( They will contain one minor change. The issue is not yet attached. It will only be very minor unless I learn of more Readme changes until tomorrow (which I don't think so). my concern is about translation. Is it only English relevant or is there translation concerns? I discussed this will Rafaella a while back. It's really only for last minute readme changes with very small volume. I can understand that changes arrive very late (but for readme files I'm not sure finally ;-) but I don't understand why we (l10n members) are not aware of them at the same time the cws is created, even for a very small volume. I created a bug for last minute readme changes a while ago (I don't have the # at hand) and described its necessity in reply of a comment that raised concerns about l10n. And I discussed it with Rafaella. If I missed any step there I apologize. The thing is that we need to keep an l10n window open for the readme that is fairly late since those changes come in late by nature. Since there seems to be a window for implementing l10n bug fixes anyway I assumed that these readme changes won't be a big problem. I am sorry if my assumption was wrong. Please also be adviced that since CWS creation presents quite an overhead, these CWS are created regardless of me having changes to the readme at the time of creation. If there is nothing to change, I will just delete the CWSs. Currently. I have one content fix (again, sorry for not being able to quote bug #s right now). Thanks a lot for your explanations, now I understand how it works. And sorry for bothering you, cws are sometimes very difficult to understand for me. Kind regards Sophie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
Re: [l10n-dev] Entire Vietnamese translation cross review
Hi, great idea to do a complete review! Nguyen Vu Hung schrieb: The target is 3.1 so we have one month until the deadline. The translation delivery deadline for OOo 3.1 was February 2nd (see http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/OOoRelease31), so that translation fixes you want to do will be too late for the OOo 3.1 release. Only critical showstoppers meanwhile have a chance to go into the 3.1. So wouldn't it be better to take a bit more time and target the OOo 3.2 release? Regards, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
Re: [l10n-dev] Entire Vietnamese translation cross review
2009/2/13 Jörg Jahnke joerg.jah...@sun.com
Hi,
great idea to do a complete review!
Nguyen Vu Hung schrieb:
The target is 3.1 so we have one month until the deadline.
The translation delivery deadline for OOo 3.1 was February 2nd (see
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/OOoRelease31), so that
translation fixes you want to do will be too late for the OOo 3.1 release.
Only critical showstoppers meanwhile have a chance to go into the 3.1. So
wouldn't it be better to take a bit more time and target the OOo 3.2
release?
Is that the po files on http://pootle.sunvirtuallab.com/vi/ are targeted for
3.1 or 3.2?
--
Best Regards,
Nguyen Hung Vu [aka: NVH] ( in Vietnamese: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng )
vuhung16plus{remo...@gmail.dot.com
vuhung16plus%7bremove...@gmail.dot.com, YIM: vuhung16 , Skype:
vuhung16dg
A brief profile: http://www.hn.is.uec.ac.jp/~vuhung/Nguyen.Vu.Hung.html
Re: [l10n-dev] Entire Vietnamese translation cross review
Op Do, 2009-02-12 om 14:23 +0900 skryf Nguyen Vu Hung: Hello all, 12 of our Vietnamese team members will do a cross review against the entire Vietnamese translation which is available on pootle. The target is 3.1 so we have one month until the deadline. The review process is simple: Every members go through every po files, suggest a better translation if one think it may need and mark it as fuzzy. Then another will go through all the fuzzy messages and do really the fixes. The main purpose of this task is maintain the consistency in our translation. We also update vi.wiktionary.org - which is an open dictionary - to make sure every members referring the same source. This is a huge and heavy task. Please let us know if you have any ideas or suggestions. We also need pootle to be up and running because the review is proccessed with pootle Aijin Kim. :D This sounds like a big but worthwhile project. A few ideas that came to mind when I read your message: * You might want to review your terminology in Pootle before you start. That way all translators will see the suggested terminology while they review the existing translations. Remember that a person with enough rights can upload a newer file or newer files in the terminology project to add more terms that you might have standardised later. * If you can download the ZIP file with all PO files, you can perhaps have a look at poconflicts in the Translate Toolkit http://translate.sourceforge.net/wiki/toolkit/poconflicts Poconflicts reads all translations in multiple files and look for conflicting translations (same English but different translations). You can also reverse the testing to see if different English strings were translated with the same text (in other words, if some ambiguous translations were used). Just some ideas Good luck! Friedel -- Recently on my blog: http://translate.org.za/blogs/friedel/en/content/language-and-dialect-codes - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
Re: [l10n-dev] Entire Vietnamese translation cross review
2009/2/13 F Wolff frie...@translate.org.za
Op Do, 2009-02-12 om 14:23 +0900 skryf Nguyen Vu Hung:
The review process is simple: Every members go through every po
files, suggest a better translation if one think it may need and mark
it as fuzzy.
Then another will go through all the fuzzy messages and do really the
fixes.
This sounds like a big but worthwhile project. A few ideas that came to
mind when I read your message:
* You might want to review your terminology in Pootle before you start.
That way all translators will see the suggested terminology while they
review the existing translations. Remember that a person with enough
rights can upload a newer file or newer files in the terminology project
to add more terms that you might have standardised later.
Vietnamese, and probably Japanese, Korean and Chinese as well
have a big problem in word segmentation that prevents pootle from
making a good terminology.
At least in Vietnamese, the feature suggested terminology in pootle
is quite useless. We have to use an external dictionary.
* If you can download the ZIP file with all PO files, you can perhaps
have a look at poconflicts in the Translate Toolkit
http://translate.sourceforge.net/wiki/toolkit/poconflicts
Poconflicts reads all translations in multiple files and look for
conflicting translations (same English but different translations). You
can also reverse the testing to see if different English strings were
translated with the same text (in other words, if some ambiguous
translations were used).
Seems like nice tool.I will try later.
--
Best Regards,
Nguyen Hung Vu [aka: NVH] ( in Vietnamese: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng )
vuhung16plus{remo...@gmail.dot.com
vuhung16plus%7bremove...@gmail.dot.com, YIM: vuhung16 , Skype:
vuhung16dg
A brief profile: http://www.hn.is.uec.ac.jp/~vuhung/Nguyen.Vu.Hung.html
Re: [l10n-dev] Suggestion for Sardinian Localization Project
Dear Valter, Le 12 févr. 09 à 19:07, Valter Mura a écrit : Hi All, My name is Valter Mura and I collaborate in the Italian Loc-Team. Some friends and me have (a small group for now) the intention to localize OpenOffice.org in Sardinian* language, which is not present in the localization project main page. I'd be the coordinator of this project. So our first step is to open a Loc project and I read the information for it. I ask you some question regarding it: - I submit an Enhancement issue in l10n subcomponent i18npool, stating _sc-IT_ as [xxx-YY] (ISO 639-1 exists for Sardinian but ISO 3166-1 doesn't, so I suppose that I have to state IT, Italian, as country). - I DO NOT state CTL and RTL, due to its romance origin. - I HAVE NOT FOUND, sadly, that the Microsoft locale identifier (LCID) is not present for Sardinian, so I cannot state one. I'll wait for a response. After that, if I understood well, I need to create a _new locale data_ to be able to fully support Sardinian as a locale, including number formats and calendar data, and having it selectable as default document language. For this step I surely need some help more... Does this involve also spellchecker and hyphenation? Are all steps mentioned above correct? May I proceed with the issue? *Sardinia: a small island in the middle of the Mediterranean sea of about 1,500,000 inhabitants. :-) Forgive my ignorance but is Sardinian considered to be an italian dialect or a language? If this is the latter you can also open a native-language project aside starting localisation work. Best, Charles-H. Schulz. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
Re: [l10n-dev] changed strings in 310_m1
Hi Ain, Ain Vagula wrote: In dbaccess/ui/dlg.po 8 strings changed since m40. Only removal of fuzzy-tags was necessary. Thank you for following this and inform us :) Kind regards Sophie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
Re: [l10n-dev] Entire Vietnamese translation cross review
Hi Nguyen Vu Hung, Vietnamese, and probably Japanese, Korean and Chinese as well have a big problem in word segmentation that prevents pootle from making a good terminology. At least in Vietnamese, the feature suggested terminology in pootle is quite useless. We have to use an external dictionary. Terminology is managed by each lang team. If you think current terminology is useless, you can try to revise the terminology po files in the terminology project. Regards, Aijin * If you can download the ZIP file with all PO files, you can perhaps have a look at poconflicts in the Translate Toolkit http://translate.sourceforge.net/wiki/toolkit/poconflicts Poconflicts reads all translations in multiple files and look for conflicting translations (same English but different translations). You can also reverse the testing to see if different English strings were translated with the same text (in other words, if some ambiguous translations were used). Seems like nice tool.I will try later. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
Re: [l10n-dev] Entire Vietnamese translation cross review
2009/2/13 Aijin Kim aijin@sun.com:
Hi Nguyen Vu Hung,
Vietnamese, and probably Japanese, Korean and Chinese as well
have a big problem in word segmentation that prevents pootle from
making a good terminology.
At least in Vietnamese, the feature suggested terminology in pootle
is quite useless. We have to use an external dictionary.
Terminology is managed by each lang team. If you think current terminology
is useless, you can try to revise the terminology po files in the
terminology project.
I did mean: The way pootle creates terminology is not so helpful, and that,
by nature, we can't create a good terminology for Vietnamese - It has to be
done manually.
--
Best Regards,
Nguyen Hung Vu [aka: NVH] ( in Vietnamese: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng )
vuhung16plus{remo...@gmail.dot.com , YIM: vuhung16 , Skype: vuhung16dg
A brief profile: http://www.hn.is.uec.ac.jp/~vuhung/Nguyen.Vu.Hung.html
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@l10n.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@l10n.openoffice.org
