On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Bruce Cowan <br...@bcowan.me.uk> wrote: > Forwarded to the list because I pressed the wrong button. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Bruce Cowan <br...@bcowan.me.uk> > Date: 5 September 2012 12:36 > Subject: Re: en_GB - Let's not miss these opportunities > To: Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com> > > > On 5 September 2012 09:40, Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Dear en_GB localizers, >> >> One of the great advantages of the relatively simple "translation" of >> en_us POT files into en_GB is that it gives you the opportunity to do >> much needed proofreading of the original en_US strings. > > Yes, I was meaning to start earlier this cycle in order to do this, > but I have been quite busy recently.
No worries. Busy is a standard condition for most FOSS contributors :-) >> I've encountered a few instances where typographical errors in the >> en_US original were simply corrected in the en_GB PO file, but no i18n >> bug had been filed against the package. >> >> vino (UPnP) >> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=683387 >> >> There was another example in avahi "occured > occurred" >> >> When you encounter these typograhical errors while going through en_GB >> PO files (I'm not talking about the common orthographic variations, >> but genuine typos), please do not simply make the correction in the >> en_GB PO without filing the i18n bug. If you don't want to take the >> time to file the i18n bug, that is fine, but please leave the string >> untranslated and someone like me will get around to translating it >> later (after filing the i18n bug). > > There's a tool in the gnome-i18n repository called en_GB.pl. You can > use en_GB.pl --check to get a list of differences between the expected > en_GB strings and the translations used. It misses a few ("ize" -> > "ise"), but it's very useful for this sort of thing. Bruce, yes, I do use the output of en_GB.pl as a reference for the common word substitutions (trash > wastebasket) and the standard transliterations. I still prefer an eyes-on approach to look for possible i18n improvements. I believe the OLPC Australia builds may use the en_GB packages (they have 53,000 XOs) and I know that many XO laptops are used in schools where English is the "language of instruction" and so I personally feel that time spent on improving the en-US strings to a generally high level of grammatical and orthographic correctness is worth the effort. cjl _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
