nuxeo-localizer
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nuxeo-localizer] Re: New line of development


From: Juan David Ibáñez Palomar
Subject: Re: [Nuxeo-localizer] Re: New line of development
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 16:34:55 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020610 Debian/1.0.0-1

As I already said in the other message, I'm not saying no to TMX,
TMX and PO don't excluse each other.

And there's an intersection, the work done for one of them will be
reused for the other.

I know translators should translate in context, and that the solution
I propose would make them to translate individual sentences out of
context. But this is only the first step.

And the thing I'm trying to address in this first step is don't force
translators to deal with the structure or formating of the document.

Another step could be to develop an interface that lets to translate
in context, it would propose translations from the message catalog
using fuzzy matching as the translator works, and it would send back
the good translation to the message catalog to improve it.

The problem here is that I don't know how to build such an interface
with the web, too much complex.

And also, we shouldn't force translators to work online.

So the solution is to support the standards, then translators could
use the tools they're used to use (implementing a free software tool
like that is still out of the scope, it would better be addressed
from within a project like MONO).

I want to address both audiences, I want to support every standard
that is worth to support, and provide a flexible tool that lets the
developer to build the best solution for his customer, using the
needed features of Localizer. If you don't need PO support, ok,
ignore it, but I'll implement it anyway because I know it would be
useful for others, included myself.

So, I think we agree, if you want me to implement TMX first, it's
easy, give me your money, or wait.




Luistxo Fernandez wrote:

You know that the message catalog can be exported and imported to
and from PO files. This means that translators could work offline,
something they can't do with LocalContent objects, and use PO editors
with an interface nice than the MessageCatalog one.

Translators that I know don´t use po editors. And the translator density per sq 
km round here in the Basque Country is quite big.

po files (and their editors) have proven good when localizing software. They 
are apt for interface msgs.

But content at large is very different from interface msgs. Localizer 
distinguishes them both very nicely now, with LocalContent and the 
MessageCatalogs...

When translating bigger documents, content at large, the translator deals with a coherent 
document. Maybe only 15% of an updated document needs re-translating but nobody orders 
"translate me these 15 messages, please". Translating according to your vision 
would be like that: only unstranslated paragraphs would appear to the translator.

But document-translating does not work that way. Instead, the translator gets this order: 
"translate me this document, but, hey, 85% of it was previously traslated so don´t 
dream about the bill". The translator has to use either a memory he has previously 
made, or gets that memory altogether with the order.

He only has to translate 15%, but deals with the whole document.

---
There´s another big difference between interface messages and content at large.

Interface messages are specific to a website, while content at large may just 
be the same as (or an adapted version of) documentation that the 
web-organisation manages in other channels.

That´s why structured text is so useful in Zope. You may have textual 
documentation for publishing reports (in Word), making presentations, sending 
emails, publishing leaflets... and easily convert that into HTML content 
through structured text. To get nice HTML pages in your dynamic Zope site, 
there´s an easy way: no need to learn Dreamweaver or HTML syntax, just keep 
using your word processor.

I envision a similar easy approach to manage multilingual content. If the 
web-organisation produces multilingual documentation, it probably does that not 
just for web publishing, but for all of its channels. So, I want to say to our 
customers: no need to learn KBabel, just keep using Wordfast and translation 
memories.

Wordfast is for Word documents, not all the content are Word documents,
fortunately.

(...)
But not everything are word documents, what I do with my HTML? I can't
use WordFast, I'm not going to buy a tool from a propietary software
vendor.


Wordfast provides much of the features of Trados, but it costs 0 euros instead 
of 4000 or so. Yes, it works over MS Word (Win or Mac), but it can handle text 
at large, not just Word documents.

Luistxo


_______________________________________________
Nuxeo-localizer mailing list
address@hidden
http://mail.freesoftware.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/nuxeo-localizer




--
J. David Ibáñez, http://www.j-david.net
Software Engineer / Ingénieur Logiciel / Ingeniero de Software







reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]