On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 07:49:29AM -0700, James A. Treacy wrote:
> >
> This is may be an unpopular idea with some of you, but so be it.
> Also note that this is not directred at you, Javier, but as a general
> comment on translations.
Ok. I will not take it personally.
>
> I don't understand why so much time is spent translating developer
> related material. Other than time spent internationalizing developer
> docs that could better be spent elsewhere, I have no objection to
> their translation. It is when I see much more widely read parts of
> the website with out of date translations, while time is spent
> localizing less widely read material (like developer documentation),
> that I get frustrated.
I know there's a part of the website that is read more than the
developer's pages. However:
a)translation is a battle in many fronts. As you will see from the CVS logs,
the spanish teamn (at least) translates all the pages, it is not focused on
an area.
b) By translating the development documents, which might seem a
contradiction since they are not user-oriented, you might get more
spanish-speaking developers interested in Debian. The downside is that you
get more translators working for Debian so you can translate even more
areas.
>
> Would it help if the webmasters created a document which lists the
> order we consider files should be translated?
>
I asked for such a document quite some time ago, WWW logs with a
good log analysis tool should do IMHO. You do have to add, however, all the
info from mirrors. It might be interesting to analyse this info and take
some conclusions... like "users always leave our web pages after reading the
boring whatever" or "after a user reads the DDP pages we have a lot of
incorrect accesses to the CVS servers" :)
Javi
