On Sat, 2004-07-17 at 01:06, Munzir Taha wrote: > It's not fair to convince everyone. It would be OK to convince the majority. > Making a new rule should not be easier. It should also be made after the > opinion of the majority. It's not logic to make a distinction here. > That's fine -- start by convincing one person on the list ;) > Ok let's forget about our professional translator POV or United Nation or > UNESCO stuff. Would you agree to look in M$, Apple, Macromedia, Adobe, and > any famous name that produce localized software? Would you consider their > professional technical translators view point? I don't know of any that > trasliterate or transcribe or transeyes any of its product names!! > Okay sure. How does MS deal with "Windows". Does it transcribe or transliterate? Why don't you go ahead and check that since you brought it up. Last I remember, they transliterated. Then again, you have to consider that most of those companies did not spend a lot of money on localization for Arabic. > I am sure any translator who is met across SATAN, KTouch, NETBUEIGUI, ... > would appreciate my suggestion and would understand why consistency would > almost be impossible. > Let's get a wiki page with a list of application names and their transliteration in a table. We can have a reference sheet and stick with consistency. > How does the translator supposed to know about the context when he translates > a lib that contains 2000 words scattered in all KDE parts? You're right. That's where QA comes in, wouldn't you think? Regards -- ------------------------------------------------------- | Mohammed Elzubeir | Visit us at: | | | http://www.arabeyes.org/ | | Arabeyes Project | Homepage: | | Unix the 'right' way | http://elzubeir.fakkir.net/ | -------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part