On 19 February 2014 20:22, Louis Suárez-Potts <lsuarezpo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> hi, > > > On 19 February 2014 14:05, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@apache.org> wrote: > > 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. > > > > :-) Your language undoes their claim. This claim of theirs is not new. > When we were doing OOo, we claimed, too, >100 languages, until I tried > insisting that we really needed to clarify what language support > meant. (Something similar occurs with format support.) Further, it > does not matter much if a language is localized to, say, Klingon (as > we tried), only to have it be forgotten by tomorrow's children and > left unmaintained. It's a truth about open source that seldom goes > acknowledged, that what counts is not what you did yesterday or even > today but what others will do with all that over the stretch of > tomorrows to come. > > Let's be as ruthlessly real uras possible. Money decisions, not > marketing lard, are at stake. > before we we get too far out on theoretical claims. It is true we and LO have different release policies and so be it. But has anyone looked at their po files, I just spent a couple of hours doing so, and reality is that they have many languages that are far more complete that ours (see https://translations.documentfoundation.org/) They also have the web site templates in pootle, very elegant, something I would like us to have. If we claim they compare oranges and apples we should not start doing the same, at least not without having looked at the facts. So, yes maybe LO takes the statement to the limit, but that is called marketing, and in general accepted. And yes I am still very frustrated about the fact that translators have to translate the same text twice. THAT would be a good answer to the blog. rgds Jan Iversen. > > > > Don > > best > louis > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > >
