I'm not speaking about how German or Spanish version are produced or even if there are reviewers on the English version. For now there's a clear lack of actual translators for French and all this is google-like translated with too much non-sense.
Also I spoke about the selection of topics when it is clear that many of them are of German origin (and links to articles are not translated at all for most of them), and interesting about German projects and point of views. There's a clear lack of audting elsewhere. You're describing the ideal of how this should work, but now what can be perceived from now. And the main reason is probably because the project lacks communacitions and requires too mcuh technical background. What I proposed was to produce independant RSS-like feeds from several regions (with a minimu mset of translation to English) to help feed these news. But French topics are mostly covered on this French mailing list (never referenced anywhere in WeeklyOSM) or on the French OSM site. Even topics transalted in English on the .org wiki are in fact not read (as well as their talk pages with a very low activity because of this). But anyway participating to the wiki is much simpler than to your project which uses specific tools: this means there are less reviewers and all tasks are done only by a few persons (possibly working outside the actual collaborative work for their OSM oragnization in their area). The barriers are visible, and this also limits your audience, and even the interest to translate these news as is due to the limited view and personal preferences only for some topics. I do not mean that the result needs to be perfect English, but a minimum understanding is still required, both from producers (selectors of topics) and translators. The frequency of WeeklyOSM also does not help doing this correctly in a timely manner: transaltions are posted too soon, or selections are inserted possibly too soon, when each topic could be worked on individually (instead of weekly issue by issue): if something is not clear, it can be delayed in all languages and we don't need to publish non-sense or things that are not understandable. You don't need to produce a constant weekly "volume" of news. One way of doing this would be to integrate a contact email or forum to signal some topics that can be discussed and explained correctly, or allowing independant groups to produce their own feeds, that you'll agregate. Those feeds could be anywhere (including on Twitter or Facebook pages: people have their prefered methods and channels for communicating). Each channel can have a few persons performing a selection and posting some summaries of what happened in a known feed. My opinion if WeeklyOSM should then become more an aggregator. As more people will be involved they will be more likely to translate correctly the few sentences needed, and links will point to the relevant groups/projects where these originate and are discussed or developed. But finally there should be a way to generate separate newsfeeds and integrate other items than those selected initilly introduced on the English feed (which does not need to be the first one available. Making the feeds more granular (topic by topic) and ordered individually (per language as they are really ready) will improve the quality of what is published for everyone. Still I maintain that someone using bots to translate automatically things without understanding them is a bad practice: it is not followed everywhere else: you need to educate your contributors. Some tools can facilitate, but compare to jobs made by bots and at the existing policy in OSM for Bots imports : we require integration, not blind massive imports (and this necessarily involved collaboration with others instead of working alone to take the leadership). 2017-02-18 22:21 GMT+01:00 Manfred A. Reiter <ma.rei...@gmail.com>: > 2017-02-18 21:10 GMT+01:00 Philippe Verdy <verd...@wanadoo.fr>: > > Et c'est encore plus vrai pour WeeklyOSM quand la source originale n'est >> en fait même pas l'anglais (souvent l'allemand, l'espagnol ou le russe), et >> où la version anglais proposée comme source est en fait une traduction >> approchante qui peut déjà contenir des tas de fautes de sens ou de >> grammaire non corrigées (surtout celles venant en fait du russe et de >> l'espagnol dont les locuteurs maîtrisent souvent plus mal l'anglais que les >> germanophones...) ce qui "perd" encore plus les traducteurs automatiques >> partant de cette traduction anglaise approximative. >> > > @all pardonnez moi, que je dise ici quelque chose en anglais. Je promesse, > que je termine - pour ma part - cette discussion. > Sorry, I admire your language, but I must correct some things, which are > really not as correct as they could be. > > Let me tell it once again and very clear: You are talking about a process, > that you don't know - not at all. > > I repeat here in short words again: > > 1. each language is produced by native speakers. > 2. if an article is in ES, the ES deliver an EN as well. (Yes, in a not > perfect EN) > 3. The EN is checked by at least two native speakers - or as in this > example <http://imgur.com/25eQCae> 4 (in words four) experienced mappers > 4. Where do you see a problem, when an article is written in Spanish and > English by a mapper from Bolivia, the English corrected by a mapper in > Australia, Canda, India and London? The result should be a nearly perfect > English. Do you agree? > 4.1. Don't forget that the Spanish version is corrected by native speakers > as well. a least two, in this example four people as well > <http://imgur.com/bPrAcfr>. > 5. Wehre is now the problem, if I translate it into German? And be aware > the German version is proofread be at least two German native speaker. - > What is your quality issue? > > May be you have better porcesses to deliver a better summary what happens > in the OSM ecosystem each week. We don't have. > > Finally, let me admit that I personally see a real problem - we do not > report adequately about what is happening in the French community. French > community means not only France, but also francophone Africa and > francophone Canada. > > Producing 52 versions per year is perhaps a bit more difficult and needs > more dedication than keeping a inflammatory speech > <http://www.linguee.de/englisch-deutsch/uebersetzung/inflammatory+speech.html> > . > > Anyway - I hope we see us in Avignon ;-) > > -- > ## Manfred Reiter - - > ## N49° 25' 11.028" E6° 50' 47.328" > ## www.weeklyOSM.eu >
_______________________________________________ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr