I'm not sure that's exactly the question. Rather, by using GTTK,
people are contributing to building [[Translation memory]] for Google,
which they can in turn use to build their statistical models. It's not
that we're using non-free software, but rather that we're contributing
to it.
-m.
On Wed,
Well, my impression, and I'm by no means an expert in this (I'm not
associated with Google), is that they emphasized quantity over quality
and forgot to mention the importance of community to our projects.
I heard that for the Swahili Wikipedia contest at least, they gave
away prizes... but perhap
Google is, in my experience, very difficult for "regular" people to
get in touch with. Sometimes, when a product is in beta, they give you
a way to contact them. They used to have an e-mail to contact them at
if you had information about bilingual corpora (I found one online
from the Nunavut parlia
The WMF mission is to provide free knowledge to the world. Wikipedia, in
particular, hopes to summarize all notable topics into a neutral sum.
Accomplishing this goal means Wikipedia an the WMF will have to evolve.
Consider the implications of the mission: Every single work that contains
notable t
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> For a variety of operational reasons, we plan to leave the feature running
> while the community decides whether to keep the feature on, assuming that
> process lasts no more than a month or so after August 15.
>
Wanted to expand on this poi
Hi folks,
It's been a little while since I've sent out an update (sorry about that).
The Pending Changes trial continues apace, with 1,382 articles configured
to use the feature as of this writing.
Most of the work on the software that powers Pending Changes is focused on
refactoring and stabili
Fajro wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Ragib Hasan wrote:
>
>> (The tool used was Google Translation Toolkit. (not Google Translate).
>> There is a distinction between these two tools. Google Translation
>> Toolkit (GTT) is a translation-memory based semi-manual translation
>> tool. Th
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 2:51 PM, quiddity wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Bod Notbod wrote:
> > I've just discovered that the BBC's music site [1] is using our
> > content for their biographies of musicians/bands [2].
> >
> > This makes me happy.
> >
> > [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/music
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Bod Notbod wrote:
> I've just discovered that the BBC's music site [1] is using our
> content for their biographies of musicians/bands [2].
>
> This makes me happy.
>
> [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/
> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/faqs#why_is_the_bbc_using_wiki
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 1:40 PM, praveenp wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 July 2010 09:19 PM, Pedro Sanchez wrote:
>>
>> Nor google nor the wmf is creating articles automatically via machine
>> translations.
>> Google is not pushing translated articles.
>>
>> Toolkit is a page where you can see a (someti
On Wednesday 28 July 2010 09:19 PM, Pedro Sanchez wrote:
>
> Nor google nor the wmf is creating articles automatically via machine
> translations.
> Google is not pushing translated articles.
>
> Toolkit is a page where you can see a (sometimes not good)
> translation, and you (if you want to) are
I've just discovered that the BBC's music site [1] is using our
content for their biographies of musicians/bands [2].
This makes me happy.
[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/
[2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/faqs#why_is_the_bbc_using_wikipedia
___
foundation
Is anyone from Google reading this thread?
Because of this thread i tried to play with the Google Translator Toolkit a
little and found some technical problems. When i tried to send bug reports
about them through the "Contact us" form, i received after a few minutes a
"bounce" message from the tra
Mark Williamson:
> GTTK can be used as a force of good if someone puts in the appropriate
> time and effort; when used _properly_ by a careful, knowledgeable
> It is my thought that the huge problem here is lack of engagement with
> communities. Essentially, Google swooped down and started droppin
Yes, of course if it's not actually reviewed and corrected by a human
it's going to be bad. What I said was that if it's used "as it was
meant to be used", the results should be indistinguishable from a
normal human translation, regardless of the language involved because
all mistakes would be fixe
Ziko, again, we are not talking about machine translations; Google
doesn't have machine translation for Bangla, Malayalam, Tamil etc.
yet. This is about translation memory.
One of the things about MAT, whose use in the professional translator
community is still debated but most popular for transla
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:20 AM, praveenp wrote:
> Consider Malayalam Language sentense "വിക്കിപീഡിയ ഒരു നല്ല വിജ്ഞാനകോശം ആണ്"
> means "Wikipedia is a good encyclopedia". How one can understand if a
> translator picks meaning of Malayalam words and create an English
> sentence like "wikipedia one
Consider Malayalam Language sentense "വിക്കിപീഡിയ ഒരു നല്ല വിജ്ഞാനകോശം ആണ്"
means "Wikipedia is a good encyclopedia". How one can understand if a
translator picks meaning of Malayalam words and create an English
sentence like "wikipedia one good encyclopedia is". Please think about
more complex
2010/7/28 Nathan :
> Just to be sure I understand...
It's good that you ask, indeed. :-)
No, it's not about free software, and the Wikimedians are not too
snobby or lazy to correct poor language. That is what I frequently do
in de.WP and eo.WP, and I suppose Ragib and many others as well. The
poi
Just to be sure I understand... What's happening here is that human
beings, using a software tool, are translating articles from the
English Wikipedia into a variety of other languages and posting them
on the comparatively small Wikipedia projects in these languages. The
articles, of unknown intrin
Dear colleagues,
My experiences with the Translate Kit are negative, too. It happened
just too often that a sentence was so twisted that I did not
understand it. Checking it with the original took me a lot of time, so
I decided that doing the translation by myself is much quicker and
reliable. It
>
> We welcome automation in translation, but not at the expense of
> introducing incorrect and messy content on wikipedia. We'd rather stay
> small and hand-craft than allow an experimental tool and unskilled
> paid translators creating a big mess.
>
Yes. This is the answer that you will get fro
22 matches
Mail list logo
