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

Re: Arabeyes Translation Teams.



On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 02:20:41PM +0300, Abdulaziz Al-Arfaj wrote:
[...]
> kbabel can build a dictionary of sorts from a
> collection of POs,
[...]
> 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'm saying that the amount of projects not using po files are a very small fraction
(If we ignore open office and mozilla). I'd say that we needn't reconsider.
We should leave the project coordinator to choose.


> >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.

Pootle or any other. We need to discuss 2 issues:
* Is it really pootle ? or webbabel ? or ....... ?
* How are we going to use CVS and pootle at the same time ?

> 
> >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.

Sorry. But this is not an answer. Who is working on it ? Details please ?

> 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 agree.

> 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 :-)

Did you try poedit ? You can't say that kbabel is the best if you didn't try other applications.

> >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.

Maybe we shouldn't. I'm not sure yet.


> >
> >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.

I'm talking email here. Not files!
and no. You can't expect all the people to use/do the same thing. This is life ;-)

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

Cheers, :-)

-- 
GNU/Linux registered user #224950
Proud Egyptian GNU/Linux User Group <www.eglug.org> Member.
Life powered by Debian, Homepage: www.foolab.org
--
Don't send me any attachment in Micro$oft (.DOC, .PPT) format please
Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Preferable attachments: .PDF, .HTML, .TXT
Thanx for adding this text to Your signature

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature