2009/1/26 Claude Paroz <cla...@2xlibre.net>: > Le lundi 26 janvier 2009 à 12:42 +0100, Kenneth Nielsen a écrit : >> I don't have much fate in anything autotranslated. One time that I >> proofread a translation that was autoupdated from a compendium and >> then supposedly read through by the translater I think I used more >> time on the proofreading than he did doing the translation. I suspect >> this is similar for most other languages and therefore I don't think >> it is a good idea to add functionality for it, that will just encurage >> bad translation practices. Any english looking language is a special >> case and should be treated as such. > > I suppose each language coordinator is experienced enough to judge this > himself :-)
Sure, let me refraise it in a way so that I don't speak for anyone else. I personally don't think automated translations in any shape, way or form, have any justification in free software for any other languages than the english "derivatives". One could of course argue, that it will always be possible to people that don't give a damn to commit broken (possible automated) translations i.e. an automate pretranslations script in DL won't change that, however I do think there is a _availability_ argument in there also. In any case, my sole concerns with the previous e-mail was that before you (being one of the DL gurus) consider using any time on this (no matter how little) I think there should be maybe a couple of positive feedbacks first? Other than from the english family of languages, which can't cover more than 4 of our 118 languages. I think some of all the other stuff you guys are talking about doing with DL is way more important. Regards Kenneth nielsen _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
