[libreoffice-l10n] Re: Bavarian and Nipmuck - report

[Greater Worcester Land Trust]

I am not deterred from thinking that a practical daily use program in the
language would be a great help to those working in it and on it.

I will say that translating literature isn't my gift or talent, but I can
break down technical concepts pretty well.

I am interested in pursuing Firefox as a trial run, and if that doesn't
break me, eventually return to LO and have a go at it.

Thanks to everyone for the input, critique, and advice.

If anyone knows folks on the Mozilla Firefox team I would be deeply
appreciative of an introduction to their l10n effort.

Thank you.

Colin
On Dec 9, 2015 9:31 AM, "Michael Bauer"  wrote:

> Somehow the mail client ate most of my email, reposting, sorry...
>
> ---
>
> Sorry for the delay in responding, I'm 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) It's 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, it's not news. Translate it into Nipmuck
> and it'll 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. I'm a very good localizer but I'm totally useless at
> translating literature or poetry or songs. It's called a specialism, no
> translator worth their money translate EVERYTHING. I'd 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 Fàilte, unless highly cynical, they would expect the rest
> in the same lingo too.
>
> As to the Help, who reads the Help? Ever? Unless they don't have web
> access. Even if some folk use it, it's 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, you'll 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 I've 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 doesn't 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 that's 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
> 

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Bavarian and Nipmuck - report

[Mihovil Stanić]

dev-l...@lists.mozilla.org

09.12.2015 u 15:37, Greater Worcester Land Trust je napisao/la:

I am not deterred from thinking that a practical daily use program in the
language would be a great help to those working in it and on it.

I will say that translating literature isn't my gift or talent, but I can
break down technical concepts pretty well.

I am interested in pursuing Firefox as a trial run, and if that doesn't
break me, eventually return to LO and have a go at it.

Thanks to everyone for the input, critique, and advice.

If anyone knows folks on the Mozilla Firefox team I would be deeply
appreciative of an introduction to their l10n effort.

Thank you.

Colin
On Dec 9, 2015 9:31 AM, "Michael Bauer"  wrote:


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

---

Sorry for the delay in responding, I'm 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) It's 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, it's not news. Translate it into Nipmuck
and it'll 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. I'm a very good localizer but I'm totally useless at
translating literature or poetry or songs. It's called a specialism, no
translator worth their money translate EVERYTHING. I'd 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 Fàilte, unless highly cynical, they would expect the rest
in the same lingo too.

As to the Help, who reads the Help? Ever? Unless they don't have web
access. Even if some folk use it, it's 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, you'll 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 I've 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 doesn't 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 that's 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

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Bavarian and Nipmuck - report

[Michael Bauer]

He doesn't need to hit the Dev list, I can help him set up the initial bit this 
weekend once I'm back at my desk. 
Michael


--
Akerbeltz • Goireasan Gàidhlig air an lìon 
Fòn: +44 141 9464437
Facs: +44 141 9452701
Tha Gàidhlig aig a' choimpiutair agad, feuch e! 
www.iGaidhlig.net

 Original message 
From: Mihovil Stanić <miho...@miho.im> 
Date:09/12/2015  15:40  (GMT+01:00) 
To: l10n@global.libreoffice.org 
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Bavarian and Nipmuck - report 

dev-l...@lists.mozilla.org

09.12.2015 u 15:37, Greater Worcester Land Trust je napisao/la:
> I am not deterred from thinking that a practical daily use program in the
> language would be a great help to those working in it and on it.
>
> I will say that translating literature isn't my gift or talent, but I can
> break down technical concepts pretty well.
>
> I am interested in pursuing Firefox as a trial run, and if that doesn't
> break me, eventually return to LO and have a go at it.
>
> Thanks to everyone for the input, critique, and advice.
>
> If anyone knows folks on the Mozilla Firefox team I would be deeply
> appreciative of an introduction to their l10n effort.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Colin
> On Dec 9, 2015 9:31 AM, "Michael Bauer" <f...@akerbeltz.org> wrote:
>
>> Somehow the mail client ate most of my email, reposting, sorry...
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Sorry for the delay in responding, I'm 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) It's 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, it's not news. Translate it into Nipmuck
>> and it'll 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. I'm a very good localizer but I'm totally useless at
>> translating literature or poetry or songs. It's called a specialism, no
>> translator worth their money translate EVERYTHING. I'd 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 Fàilte, unless highly cynical, they would expect the rest
>> in the same lingo too.
>>
>> As to the Help, who reads the Help? Ever? Unless they don't have web
>> access. Even if some folk use it, it's 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 spellchecke

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Bavarian and Nipmuck - report

[Sophie]

Hello,
Le 09/12/2015 15:37, Greater Worcester Land Trust a écrit :
> I am not deterred from thinking that a practical daily use program in the
> language would be a great help to those working in it and on it.

Oh, of course, this is not what I had in mind. I think the best way to
express yourself is to have the tools in your language. What as said is
that LibreOffice is quite terrible to begin with, and there are
alternatives that maybe really interesting for users and less exhausting
for a translator working alone (I've done it for French for years :-)
> 
> I will say that translating literature isn't my gift or talent, but I can
> break down technical concepts pretty well.
> 
> I am interested in pursuing Firefox as a trial run, and if that doesn't
> break me, eventually return to LO and have a go at it.

Great, try to get more people around you, no need for ten persons, but 3
to 4 is already a big team.
> 
> Thanks to everyone for the input, critique, and advice.

Don't hesitate to come back to us if you need anything concerning
localization even if it's not LO.
> 
> If anyone knows folks on the Mozilla Firefox team I would be deeply
> appreciative of an introduction to their l10n effort.

Mihovil gave you the link to their l10n list, if you have difficulty or
lack of answer (but I don't think so) don't hesitate to ping me directly.

Cheers
Sophie

-- 
Sophie Gautier sophie.gaut...@documentfoundation.org
GSM: +33683901545
IRC: sophi
Co-founder - Release coordinator
The Document Foundation

-- 
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