On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 12:33:43PM +0200, Bastian Venthur wrote: > * I don't believe we should favor XML(-ish stuff) above simplified > markup when the target audience are humans. XML is good for many things > but definitely not for being edited by the casual user. BTW there are
XML is at least well structured. > wiki engines which support both: simplified wiki syntax and raw HTML. > Please think of the translators: If I see an English page with an > outdated, wrong or nonresistant German translation it would be a matter > of minutes correcting this in a wiki. But in the current system the all > the technical obstacles crush on me so I forget it and just move on > without translating anything. I obtain in this case the current source from a revision control system which works mostly very easily. I failed for Eclipse because of the Java stuff I don't know and the really many CVS modules, and also for MySQL IIRC. But now the benefits are: * I have recent sources * I can get easily in contact with upstream * I try and play with this software and often watch the development for multiple years * I learn from these projects > * Moving even more towards a programming style environment by > suggesting gettext for translations, seems very inappropriate and would > raise the barrier for non coders even more. Translating text shouldn't > be so complicated, if it can be made as easy as editing a wiki or CMS. But we want also to educate our users :-) It's my opinion that a person which is not able to follow one or two simple steps (apt-get install cvs; cvs -d... co .) should not translate any computer based stuff. Probably the most important barrier is to find these information describing the first steps ... Jens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
