[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Arabeyes Translation Teams.

On 8/2/06, Mohammed Sameer <msameer at foolab dot org> wrote:

Also using only PO files is bad. I understand that 99% of the FOSS projects use PO
files but let's take an example:
When we started translating Action Apps, The files were php files not PO files.
We spent a hell lot of time to convert them to PO files.
What's wrong with using the original formats ?


Nothing of course is wrong with using the original formats. However,
we had several reasons in mind why we wanted everything to be in PO
files. For one, kbabel can build a dictionary of sorts from a
collection of POs, and many of us find this extremely useful. Having
all files in PO format means that the dictionary we build
automatically will be comprehensive of all strings in all translation
projects, thus ensuring better consistency.

But of course, this is just a useful feature. If it severely
interferes with actually getting the translation done, maybe we need
to reconsider.


I also guess that using pootle (Or some other web translation interface) might prove
useful. I can't tell as this is something we didn't try. I can set up a pootle (Or
whatever tool) on my website to test and see. The problem is that it won't know about
the translations committed to the CVS.



Agreed. We should definitely give Pootle a test-drive.


We also need a technical glossary. This is IMHO a must. The word lists project
contains a lot of words but it's not that useful.



The technical glossary is being worked on as we speak.


Maybe we can also try to use programs other than kbabel. poedit works under windows.
Maybe we can convince some windows users to help the openoffice translation for example.



Kbabel is the one we have documented. At the time when I started
translating, we had a choice between kbabel and gtranslator.
gtranslator was so buggy though that using kbabel was a no-brainer
decision.

I am not sure if poedit existed at the time. But if a translator wants
to use it and as long as it does not mess up the files, sure why not?
However that will not stop people like me from advocating that kbabel
is still the _best_ translation tool out there because, well, its just
the truth :-)


I wrote my reply before I reach this point. It's cool to find someone sharing
the same thoughts.

I'd also say that we drop all the development projects. Concentrate on translation
and testing FOSS applications for Arabic support. Report bugs (and maybe try to fix them
if we have resources) and interact with various projects developers.



Well, we do not actually have to do that. We can concentrate on
translation sure, but dropping development projects will not help,
IMHO.


Even if someone comes and translates 10 strings then decided to quit. We gained
the 10 strings and we gained him as he might return back.


There's also something: The "Don't ever use cp1256 encoding" attitude.
I don't understand what's wrong with cp1256 ? It's a well known encoding. If I write an
email in cp1256 and all the headers are fine. I guess it's not a sin.



Nothing is wrong with any encoding as long as we _all_ use that same
encoding and use it everywhere. But IMHO we cannot have some files in
UTF-8 and some in CP1256. You just have to choose one and stick with
it. For obvious reasons, we choose UTF-8.


Thanks for the ideas Mohammed. Good to see your still concerned :-)

Abdulaziz,