Hi :) Machine Translators are not perfect anyway. GT might provide a good starting point but then human beings with skills and knowledge need to take over and at least proof-read and modify.
I think OmegaT can be used quite happily without using GT or any other MT and the main purpose of Milo's post was to show that OmegaT is an excellent tool for this type of work. The use of GT was just to get to a finished result faster. Please can we try to avoid the often repeated discussions about MTs and GT in particular issue and instead just focus on the main point about using OmegaT to translate the "Published Guides"? Regards from Tom :) On 26 February 2015 at 12:23, Sveinn í Felli <[email protected]> wrote: > Þann fim 26.feb 2015 10:22, skrifaði Milos Sramek: > >> Machine translation can be of big advantage if it works. We have used >> Google Translate for translation between Slovak and Czech versions. I >> estimate that it has reduced the required time by about 75%. Slovak and >> Czech are close languages so GT works very well. >> > > Is the use of Google Translate in a FOSS-project compatible with the > GT-license (EULA) ? > I do recall discussions in various projects where there were some doubts > concerning this. > > Sveinn í Felli > > > -- > To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] > Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to- > unsubscribe/ > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
