Re: Ensuring Translation Quality

From: "Kathiravelu Pradeeban" <kk.pradeeban@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Ensuring Translation Quality

>> 1) Remove .strings files for languages with translation less then 90% complete. We should preserve po-files in case somebody will want to improve them, obviously.
>
> That doesn't make any sense to do so. Many words are not translated
> yet to the local languages. So we need time...

They have more than enough time to update them. In fact, we have a handful of people who care to update their translation, but other do not. The maintanability and reasonable completeness is mandatory in other community projects like Gnome or KDE. The undeniable fact is that most translations are abandoned, have a little hope that someone will take interest in them again, and should not be included as their quality hurts Abiword image.

>> 2) Remove Esperanto [eo] translation entirely due to its low quality, and considering the fact that Esperanto is toy, artificial language, and quality translation can not be assured without contributors' voluntarism.
>
> ...All the languages came from humans. So did
> Esperanto. Calling Esperanto a toy language is an offense.

From _people_, not from ophtalmologists of XIX century. I understand that a little part of several thousands of humankind is fond of conlangs, and delights playing with funny letters and other puerile stuff, but translations are to be made by people actually knowing the language. Quenya, Esperanto, Interlingua, Na'vi or Klingon have no native speakers, so translations can only be done in the form of vision each translator have on that conlang, without any guidance possible.

Because we should avoid translations made by non-natives as we cannot judge their veritability, machine translations and translations into conlangs are not acceptable.

> The localization of Esperanto is of very high quality...

It is not. It is full of inconsistencies which are result of the language situation described above.
 
Received on Fri Sep 23 06:04:58 2011