"Thomas T. Dorsey" wrote: > > From: "Christian Couder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > There is a difference between internationalization (i18n) and > > translation (l10n). > > > Internationalization is supposed to make it possible to translate things > > (like an app using gettext or a web site using content negotiation). > > Translation is making some translation available for the things that > > have been internationalized. > > Sometimes, it is really not that simple when you start playing with MBCS, > right to left writing (Arabic), or even something like top to bottom then > right to left MBCS (a traditional writing style in some Asian coutries.) > > (Mostly for those that > Internationalization (I18N), in its simplified meaning, is a combination of > methods to design and implement an application or system to theoretically > support any possible language. An i18n application must be able to support > all the languages supported by the operating system and/or libraries, even > if it may operate awkwardly. > > Localization (L10N), is a process to make an application or system to > support a locale (both language and location) that is not currently > supported. In supporting the locale, the application or system will usually > be changed to not only support the language, but to also to support the > local "customs". These customs may be simple as just changing the shortcut > assignments, but may go as far as making major locale specific application > modifications or additions. A well designed i18n application will easily > support the new language and key assignments, but the modification and > additions are usually only possible at the l10n stage. Although it is > ideal, a l10n application does not necesarily have to be an i18n > application. The translation of the documentation is also an import part > that is dealt with durring l10n. > > Translation (T9N?), is the process of translating the language. Usually the > term translation is used to specify a stage of the l10n process, but for > some locales the translation stage may be the only stage required for the > entire l10n process.
Your explanation is very good. Thanks. > Out of these processes, the i18n process is the most important. With good > i18n support, the l10n process of complex languages (ie. Chinese, Japanese, > Vietnamese, Korean) is greatly simplified (ask anyone else that did l10n > work in one of these languages). Without i18n support the effort put into > the l10n process may even justify a code fork (happened very frequently in > the past). > > I support the creation of a deban-l10n for discussion of general l10n > issues. It may be better discussing alot of this in the i18n list, but I > think it would be very useful for those that are trying to get help in l10n > issues for a certain language or a set of languages they want to support. > Maybe creating a l10n list for every language may be an option, but that > might be a little overkill. ;-) Thanks for your support. There are already some debian-l10n-xxxx for different langages (french, dutch, portuguese, spanish). > > So if we want to talk about translation in the i18n list, we should at > > least change the description of the i18n list. > > For example we could change it to "Internationalization (i18n) and > > translation (l10n) of the distribution are discussed here." > > This also sounds good to me. > > > And currently there is one low traffic "debian-i18n" list and many > > "debian-l10n-xxxxxx" lists with higher traffic. So in my opinion, people > > are more interested in discussing translation than internationalisation. > > So it would be better anyway to change the name of the i18n list (if we > > don't want 2 lists). > > I think we should keep the i18n list either way since l10n and i18n are > linked, but separate issues. Ok. So as you and Tomohiro Kubota seem to prefer two different lists, I go back to my first proposal. I will ask for a new list called "debian-l10n". (Well, if no other people make me change my mind again.) Regards, Christian.
