Thanks for your thoughts.
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 14:30 +0200, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> 2010/10/5 Roché Compaan <roche@...>:
> > What were the design reasons for forcing a single language (both
> > interface and content) in LinguaPlone? Do you still think this is good
> > idea?
> We actually didn't do that in the beginning. It has cost us countless
> frustration from users in various projects to realize that this was
> Having multiple languages on the same page is highly confusing to
> users. It's a much better default to have exactly one language per
> page. You also need to make sure that all links from a page only go to
> content in the same language or make the language change very clear in
> the link itself.
> Of course with all good defaults exceptions exist.
We're still trying to determine if Connexions is such an exception. It
is very different to a company website in that it has educational
resources in many languages. It seems plausible that a multilingual user
familiar with the English UI on Connexions might prefer having the UI in
English while they are reading modules in another language. There are
some instances where a single language site won't work like Google and
Amazon. I would be very annoyed if Google don't show me hits in other
languages if I perform a search using the English interface. Similarly I
want to be able to search for books and reviews in other languages on
Amazon even if I use the English interface.
Wikipedia adopted a single language policy and it seems to work well. In
my estimation Connexions seems closer to a Wikipedia than to a Google or
Upfront Systems http://www.upfrontsystems.co.za