From: Duncan L. <du...@li...> - 2006-07-06 19:21:25
|
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 16:18 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:=20 > On 7/6/06, Duncan Lithgow wrote: >=20 > > > Definitely not me. I've seen quality of Rosetta translations and I'd > > > rather not see them :( > > But would they get worse than what we have? I assume they could only ge= t > > better - maybe not great quality - but still better. > > > > Do you think it would make it easier to attract better translators if w= e > > used Rosetta? It's my feeling that it would be better. > > > > Of course we wouldn't be forced to accept the translations if someone > > can see that they're bad and need some work. >=20 > The issue with rosetta translators is that many of them not only > simply don't use the application they translate on regular basis, but > even don't run it to see what they are actually translating. Maybe > Danish translators are such great guys that they translate only those > application they use passionately :) Well, I'm working on some avenues for the danish translation... As for rosetta, Don says it's your call. How about we try it for 2.1/2.2 and see how it goes. Surely it's easier to fix small translation errors than try and find translators for each language ourselves. And how _do_ we find translators? And on the list below you'll notice that some of them are quite old. Spanish from 2001, Italian from 2003, Polish from 2003. Those are some big language groups that are way behind. Shall I start emailing them to see who is interesting in keeping going? Here's the ages of what we have now: cs - 2004 da - 2002 (movement happening) de - 2006 eo - 2004 (esperanto!) es - 2001 fi - 2005 fr - 2006 hu - 2004 it - 2003 lt - 2005 (lithuanian?) nb - 2006 (norwegian dialect?) nl - 2006 no - 2006 pl - 2003 pt_BR - 2006 (Brazilian-Portuguese) ro - 2003? ru - 2006 sk - 2005 (SLOVAK) sv - 2006 zh_CN - 2003 (Mandarin?) --=20 Linux user: 372812 | GPG key ID: 21A8C63A | http://lithgow-schmidt.dk |