On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote:
> http://www.italovignoli.org/2014/02/language-support-of-office-suites/ > > Don't you love it when they come up with these false comparisons? > > If you look a little bit closer you see that they are releasing and > counting languages where the UI is only 15% translated. So yes, if > you are willing to release incomplete work then you can claim to > "support" more languages. But what kind of support is this? > > A specific example: Tartar (15% UI translated) > > I thought OOo had a requirement for 80% completion before releasing a > translation. With AOO we made the requirement be 100%. LO releases > 15% complete UI translations ?! > > Of course, we shouldn't judge their release criteria. That is their > business (and their users) not ours. But when they make false > comparisons in a table, comparing apples-to-oranges, then we ought to > note it. It is not fair to claim lower standards are the same as > greater results. > > Another example: They've released Hebrew support at 90% complete. We > have Hebrew support at 96% complete, but we have not released it yet. > > Another example: Our Icelandic translation (unreleased) is 95% > complete. Theirs (released) is only 88%. > > Another example: We have 36 languages at 100% complete UI > translation. LO has only 13. > > Look at the data and make your own comparisons: > > https://translate.apache.org/projects/aoo40/ > > https://translations.documentfoundation.org/projects/libo_ui/ More recently posted on the blog by the author: "italovignoli February 19, 2014 at 2:12 am<http://www.italovignoli.org/2014/02/language-support-of-office-suites/#comment-6950> Although the comparison was between LibreOffice and Microsoft Office, I have updated the table to reflect the situation at AOO provided by that project." In all fairness, even if they're not complete, it's still an impressive list of languages LO is claiming. Don
