Re: [Inkscape-devel] [Inkscape-tester] New translations we need?
On 6/11/06, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Of these, we have some at >80% already. The ones in Inkscape that are not at 80% are:
bg, en_CA, en_GB, fi, nb, ne, nl, pl, pt, pr_BR, ru, sk, sr, sv, uk, vi
It appears that you were looking at HEAD, not 2.14. And all figures are different. For instance, GNOME 2.14 is 99,86% translated into Russian.
Alexandre
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 07:10:19PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On 6/11/06, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Of these, we have some at >80% already. The ones in Inkscape that are not at 80% are:
bg, en_CA, en_GB, fi, nb, ne, nl, pl, pt, pr_BR, ru, sk, sr, sv, uk, vi
It appears that you were looking at HEAD, not 2.14. And all figures are different. For instance, GNOME 2.14 is 99,86% translated into Russian.
Ah, yes, I figured comparisons from their HEAD to our HEAD would be most meaningful, although I'm sure it could be argued differently...
This weekend I got a couple contacts for Japanese and three Indian languages. :-)
Bryce
Ah, yes, I figured comparisons from their HEAD to our HEAD would be most meaningful, although I'm sure it could be argued differently...
This weekend I got a couple contacts for Japanese and three Indian languages. :-)
Found those 2 organizions of translators today : http://www.indlinux.org/ http://www.panl10n.net/ and will try to contact them tonight.
Plus i'm trying to find a volunteer for pt (portuguese) translation (pt_BR is in a quite good shape, and I don't know if Brazilian Portuguese is very different from Portuguese) : Portuguese is a lonaguage spoken also in some places in Africa and Asia (formal colonies).
Regards,
matiphas
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Matiphas wrote:
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:37:26 +0200 From: Matiphas <matiphas@...8...> To: Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...> Cc: Inkscape Devs ML inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] [Inkscape-tester] New translations we need?
Ah, yes, I figured comparisons from their HEAD to our HEAD would be most meaningful, although I'm sure it could be argued differently...
This weekend I got a couple contacts for Japanese and three Indian languages. :-)
Found those 2 organizions of translators today : http://www.indlinux.org/ http://www.panl10n.net/ and will try to contact them tonight.
Plus i'm trying to find a volunteer for pt (portuguese) translation (pt_BR is in a quite good shape, and I don't know if Brazilian Portuguese is very different from Portuguese)
I've been told before that they were quite different but in the limited context of Vector Graphics Software chances are good the differences will be only small differences especially if the translators are willing to collobarte and push for consistency.
Portuguese is a lonaguage spoken also in some places in Africa and Asia (formal colonies).
(former colonies)
Keeping the language formal should increase the chances of it being reusable and reduce the chances of accidentally include slang or other terminology that doesn't travel well. So long as there is an understanding in place that we want to avoid any non-essential differences things can probably be kept fairly consistent within the language dialects.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 08:37:26PM +0200, Matiphas wrote:
Ah, yes, I figured comparisons from their HEAD to our HEAD would be most meaningful, although I'm sure it could be argued differently...
This weekend I got a couple contacts for Japanese and three Indian languages. :-)
Found those 2 organizions of translators today : http://www.indlinux.org/ http://www.panl10n.net/ and will try to contact them tonight.
Excellent! Let us know how discussions with these two groups turn out.
Bryce
Matiphas <matiphas@...8...> writes:
Found those 2 organizions of translators today : http://www.indlinux.org/ http://www.panl10n.net/ and will try to contact them tonight.
Maybe also check with http://www.arabeyes.org/project.php?proj=GNOME
Cheers, Colin
On 6/12/06, Bryce Harrington wrote:
It appears that you were looking at HEAD, not 2.14. And all figures are different. For instance, GNOME 2.14 is 99,86% translated into Russian.
Ah, yes, I figured comparisons from their HEAD to our HEAD would be most meaningful, although I'm sure it could be argued differently...
Translation of GNOME into Russian happens this way: closer to release we start bugging translators with requests for updates. As for 2.14, we also announced local gnome-cyr(illic) Love Day and managed to get even more new and updated translations. There is no such day for Inkscape :)
Overall, translation process looks close, if not equal: some translators use SVN on daily basis and send updates periodically, some use releases only and therefore do updates after strings freeze.
Since Inkscape's strings freeze is already announced for 2 weeks or so, comparison should rather be made to GNOME 2.14 than to HEAD ;)
Alexandre
On 12/06/06, Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...> wrote:
On 6/11/06, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Of these, we have some at >80% already. The ones in Inkscape that are not at 80% are:
bg, en_CA, en_GB, fi, nb, ne, nl, pl, pt, pr_BR, ru, sk, sr, sv, uk, vi
Apologies if I missed the beginning of this thread or I am out of place, but is there really a deficiency in en_GB translations? If so, there cannot be a good reason for this as there are plenty of Inkscapers in Albion.
See http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=13030849&forum_id... where your prompting may have resulted in some action
Also, can anyone confirm that the tool poedit is worthwhile for one doing translations - I am part way through porting it to Mac OS, and stopped through having doubts that poedit was important enough to spend time on ...
Are we looking for just a little more effort to finish this? I would be happy to put that effort in. On the other hand, translations into non-English, non-FIGS languages would seem to be of greater benefit to the community, and I wouldn't want to divert translation efforts.
Ben.
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 10:59:49AM +0100, Ben Fowler wrote:
On 12/06/06, Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...> wrote:
On 6/11/06, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Of these, we have some at >80% already. The ones in Inkscape that are not at 80% are:
bg, en_CA, en_GB, fi, nb, ne, nl, pl, pt, pr_BR, ru, sk, sr, sv, uk, vi
Apologies if I missed the beginning of this thread or I am out of place, but is there really a deficiency in en_GB translations? If so, there cannot be a good reason for this as there are plenty of Inkscapers in Albion.
The above list was generated by looking at what translations GNOME had at 50% or greater, and en_CA and en_GB were there. I thought it'd make a good goal to have Inkscape get >80% translations for the same set of languages that GNOME has the best support for. I was surprised too that en_CA and en_GB showed up there; I assume they ranked high due to it being relatively easy to do them, compared with going from English to a non-English language.
Bryce
On 20/06/06, Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 10:59:49AM +0100, Ben Fowler wrote:
On 12/06/06, Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...> wrote:
On 6/11/06, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Of these, we have some at >80% already. The ones in Inkscape that are not at 80% are:
bg, en_CA, en_GB, fi, nb, ne, nl, pl, pt, pr_BR, ru, sk, sr, sv, uk, vi
Apologies if I missed the beginning of this thread or I am out of place, but is there really a deficiency in en_GB translations? If so, there cannot be a good reason for this as there are plenty of Inkscapers in Albion.
The above list was generated by looking at what translations GNOME had at 50% or greater, and en_CA and en_GB were there. I thought it'd make a good goal to have Inkscape get >80% translations for the same set of languages that GNOME has the best support for. I was surprised too that en_CA and en_GB showed up there; I assume they ranked high due to it being relatively easy to do them, compared with going from English to a non-English language.
Thank you, I had to read that twice before I grasped it. GNOME is reporting on GNOME translations, not on Inkscape translations. At the moment, Inkscape's en_GB is arguably at 0% as there is no en_GB.po file.
Assuming that this file is needed, there are three possibilities: 1) There is a volunteer who has made contact with one of the regulars on the translators list; 2) I can start the ball rolling by copying the inkscape.pot file to en_GB.po and adding it to the tracker, if this is not premature and 3) I can cajole the Huddersfield Linux User group into maintaining this file. Obviously (1) has priority, but I think that partial and exploratory translations are considered helpful as stepping stones.
I looked at a version of inkscape.pot of a few weeks ago, and it had 2175 entries, so my admiration for the work of the translation teams which was already high is increased by my seeing the magnitude and repetitive nature of the task. Personally, I feel that if an en_GB translation is welcomed, then we should see to it that it is done very speedily, as it would be ridiculous for an English to English translation to take a significant amount of time, wouldn't it?
Ben
Assuming that this file is needed, there are three possibilities: 1) There is a volunteer who has made contact with one of the regulars on the translators list;
I think it is the case. Kinsley Turner has started (and even finished) this job.
Regards,
matiphas
participants (7)
-
unknown＠example.com -
Alan Horkan -
Alexandre Prokoudine -
Ben Fowler -
Bryce Harrington -
Colin Marquardt -
Matiphas