Update of the localization files

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
Next » 12
sophi sophi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Update of the localization files

Hi all,

Now that the 3.3 localization is over for LibO too, could we plan an
update of the localization files and with which version of OOo shall we
update the files to get in sync.

There is already some work to be done (approx 7000 words up to
DEV300m90), so the sooner we know the better for us to organize our time
between the fixes and the new translations.

Thanks in advance
Kind regards
Sophie

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Olivier Hallot Olivier Hallot
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Update of the localization files

Hi Sophie

I have a demand on this subject.

I don't have enough energy to dedicate to the translation of two large
softwares like LibO and OO. I had already made my choice to stick with
LibreOffice.

So someone else will take care of OO. When it come to import the
developments from OO to LibO it will be important to flag *all new OO
strings* (m90) as fuzzy or untranslated, even if they are translated
already, so that I can revise and aprove for LibreOffice. Otherwise
LibreOffice will bear inconsistencies because of an external influence.

It may be quite hard to make difference between a *new* (m90) translated
string and an old one.

Thanks

Olivier


Em 28-12-2010 07:45, Sophie Gautier escreveu:

> Hi all,
>
> Now that the 3.3 localization is over for LibO too, could we plan an
> update of the localization files and with which version of OOo shall we
> update the files to get in sync.
>
> There is already some work to be done (approx 7000 words up to
> DEV300m90), so the sooner we know the better for us to organize our time
> between the fixes and the new translations.
>
> Thanks in advance
> Kind regards
> Sophie
>

--
Olivier Hallot
Founder, Steering Commitee Member - The Document Foundation
Translation Leader for Brazilian Portuguese
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
sophi sophi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Update of the localization files

Hi Olivier,
On 28/12/2010 13:35, Olivier Hallot wrote:

> Hi Sophie
>
> I have a demand on this subject.
>
> I don't have enough energy to dedicate to the translation of two large
> softwares like LibO and OO. I had already made my choice to stick with
> LibreOffice.
>
> So someone else will take care of OO. When it come to import the
> developments from OO to LibO it will be important to flag *all new OO
> strings* (m90) as fuzzy or untranslated, even if they are translated
> already, so that I can revise and aprove for LibreOffice. Otherwise
> LibreOffice will bear inconsistencies because of an external influence.

Is there somebody working on the new Brazilian strings already in OOo?
Or are we sure that the strings have not been touched?
>
> It may be quite hard to make difference between a *new* (m90) translated
> string and an old one.

This is why I ask: do we merge Libo with the last dev versions or do we
work on the last SDF file only (I think it's OOo330m9) because it is now
two completely separated products?

The amount of work is and will not be the same for us and if possible,
it would be great if we have some plans on this to organize/optimize our
time and our work.

Kind regards
Sophie
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Olivier Hallot Olivier Hallot
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Update of the localization files

Hi Sophie

Em 28-12-2010 09:30, Sophie Gautier escreveu:
> Hi Olivier,

(snip)
>
> Is there somebody working on the new Brazilian strings already in OOo?
> Or are we sure that the strings have not been touched?

Last time I paid a visit on their pootle server it seemed to me nobody
was working on, or is very late. I have not checked further. The L10
lists does not mention new translation leader.

>>
>> It may be quite hard to make difference between a *new* (m90) translated
>> string and an old one.
>
> This is why I ask: do we merge Libo with the last dev versions or do we
> work on the last SDF file only (I think it's OOo330m9) because it is now
> two completely separated products?
>
> The amount of work is and will not be the same for us and if possible,
> it would be great if we have some plans on this to organize/optimize our
> time and our work.

My best (and non-educated) guess for the moment is to import feature by
feature of our interest, toghether with the appropriate strings.


--
Olivier Hallot
Comitê Executivo
The Document Foundation
Voicing the enterprise needs
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Jan Holesovsky Jan Holesovsky
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Update of the localization files

In reply to this post by sophi
Hi Sophie,

On 2010-12-28 at 14:30 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:

> > It may be quite hard to make difference between a *new* (m90) translated
> > string and an old one.
>
> This is why I ask: do we merge Libo with the last dev versions or do we
> work on the last SDF file only (I think it's OOo330m9) because it is now
> two completely separated products?

We are still working towards a plan how to cherry pick or merge from OOo
from now on, so do not expect any huge changes in the next 2 weeks or
so ;-)  We have to evaluate the possibilities first, but most probably,
this will be more on case-by-case basis, ie. the amount of strings to
translate will grow at reasonable pace, not a huge drop of stuff to
translate from a day to day.

Regards,
Kendy

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
sophi sophi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Update of the localization files

Hi Kendy,

On 29/12/2010 19:21, Jan Holesovsky wrote:

> Hi Sophie,
>
> On 2010-12-28 at 14:30 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:
>
>>> It may be quite hard to make difference between a *new* (m90) translated
>>> string and an old one.
>>
>> This is why I ask: do we merge Libo with the last dev versions or do we
>> work on the last SDF file only (I think it's OOo330m9) because it is now
>> two completely separated products?
>
> We are still working towards a plan how to cherry pick or merge from OOo
> from now on, so do not expect any huge changes in the next 2 weeks or
> so ;-)  We have to evaluate the possibilities first, but most probably,
> this will be more on case-by-case basis, ie. the amount of strings to
> translate will grow at reasonable pace, not a huge drop of stuff to
> translate from a day to day.

Our concerns here, with Olivier and the few of us not doing localization
for OOo any more, is that the localization will be done by someone else,
may be a professional agency. Most of the time the quality is very very
low because the agencies know nothing about the product where we work
with it and localize it since years. So, no matter the amount of
strings, if we are sure of the consistency and we do not have to
research in the files to ensure it. Currently there is a little more
than 6000 new/fuzzy words until DEV300m90, it's not so much and even
less if we have a long deadline ;)

But we need to merge the strings quiet soon now because we didn't have
the opportunity any more to fix l10n issues in OOo 3.3 since
September/October, so we may have a quite long list on our table now.
Even if it's in 3 weeks or the month after, having an idea of the time
frame will help to reserve the needed time/resources to fix these issues.

Kind regards
Sophie
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Martin Srebotnjak Martin Srebotnjak
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Update of the localization files

Hi,

I keep localizing OOo on my computer, with regular updates, knowing or hoping that at this stage most of changes for OOo 3.4 will make it to LO 3.4. Later, when all files are merged (OOo sdf + lo-build) into a LO set of po files, I can center on localizing those only.

Lp, m.

2010/12/29 Sophie Gautier <[hidden email]>
Hi Kendy,


On 29/12/2010 19:21, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
Hi Sophie,

On 2010-12-28 at 14:30 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:

It may be quite hard to make difference between a *new* (m90) translated
string and an old one.

This is why I ask: do we merge Libo with the last dev versions or do we
work on the last SDF file only (I think it's OOo330m9) because it is now
two completely separated products?

We are still working towards a plan how to cherry pick or merge from OOo
from now on, so do not expect any huge changes in the next 2 weeks or
so ;-)  We have to evaluate the possibilities first, but most probably,
this will be more on case-by-case basis, ie. the amount of strings to
translate will grow at reasonable pace, not a huge drop of stuff to
translate from a day to day.

Our concerns here, with Olivier and the few of us not doing localization for OOo any more, is that the localization will be done by someone else, may be a professional agency. Most of the time the quality is very very low because the agencies know nothing about the product where we work with it and localize it since years. So, no matter the amount of strings, if we are sure of the consistency and we do not have to research in the files to ensure it. Currently there is a little more than 6000 new/fuzzy words until DEV300m90, it's not so much and even less if we have a long deadline ;)

But we need to merge the strings quiet soon now because we didn't have the opportunity any more to fix l10n issues in OOo 3.3 since September/October, so we may have a quite long list on our table now. Even if it's in 3 weeks or the month after, having an idea of the time frame will help to reserve the needed time/resources to fix these issues.

Kind regards
Sophie


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/l10n/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Jan Holesovsky Jan Holesovsky
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Update of the localization files

In reply to this post by sophi
Hi Sophie,

On 2010-12-29 at 19:52 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:

> But we need to merge the strings quiet soon now because we didn't have
> the opportunity any more to fix l10n issues in OOo 3.3 since

I am confused - did you mean 3.4 here, or I did not understand your
initial mail, please?

Thank you,
Kendy

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Jan Holesovsky Jan Holesovsky
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Update of the localization files

In reply to this post by sophi
Hi Sophie,

On 2010-12-29 at 19:52 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:

> >> This is why I ask: do we merge Libo with the last dev versions or do we
> >> work on the last SDF file only (I think it's OOo330m9) because it is now
> >> two completely separated products?
> >
> > We are still working towards a plan how to cherry pick or merge from OOo
> > from now on, so do not expect any huge changes in the next 2 weeks or
> > so ;-)  We have to evaluate the possibilities first, but most probably,
> > this will be more on case-by-case basis, ie. the amount of strings to
> > translate will grow at reasonable pace, not a huge drop of stuff to
> > translate from a day to day.
>
> Our concerns here, with Olivier and the few of us not doing localization
> for OOo any more, is that the localization will be done by someone else,
> may be a professional agency. Most of the time the quality is very very
> low because the agencies know nothing about the product where we work
> with it and localize it since years. So, no matter the amount of
> strings, if we are sure of the consistency and we do not have to
> research in the files to ensure it. Currently there is a little more
> than 6000 new/fuzzy words until DEV300m90, it's not so much and even
> less if we have a long deadline ;)

Ah, maybe I understand now ;-)  So of course, it is up to you to define
if you want to have the translations merged from the OOo tree to the LO
tree for 3.4, or not.  I understand it that you'd prefer not to, ie.
l10n repo (containing the localize.sdf's) untouched by the merges from
OOo, right?

Thank you,
Kendy

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
sophi sophi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Update of the localization files

In reply to this post by Jan Holesovsky
On 29/12/2010 20:25, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
> Hi Sophie,
>
> On 2010-12-29 at 19:52 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:
>
>> But we need to merge the strings quiet soon now because we didn't have
>> the opportunity any more to fix l10n issues in OOo 3.3 since
>
> I am confused - did you mean 3.4 here, or I did not understand your
> initial mail, please?

No I mean 3.3. Sorry the difficulty to explain all this...

We are normally continuously correcting small bugs in our translation
files, mostly the help files but also sometimes UI.
This is now two/three months that we didn't touch the files because we
do not have them in the LO Pootle repository and we are not working any
more on the OOo Pootle repository. So some teams have now a fair amount
of issues to fix in their files, that will take time and resources, and
we need to have the complete set of files in the LO Pootle repository
for that.

Kind regards
Sophie
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
sophi sophi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] Re: Update of the localization files

In reply to this post by Jan Holesovsky
Hi Kendy,
On 29/12/2010 20:31, Jan Holesovsky wrote:

> Hi Sophie,
>
> On 2010-12-29 at 19:52 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:
>
>>>> This is why I ask: do we merge Libo with the last dev versions or do we
>>>> work on the last SDF file only (I think it's OOo330m9) because it is now
>>>> two completely separated products?
>>>
>>> We are still working towards a plan how to cherry pick or merge from OOo
>>> from now on, so do not expect any huge changes in the next 2 weeks or
>>> so ;-)  We have to evaluate the possibilities first, but most probably,
>>> this will be more on case-by-case basis, ie. the amount of strings to
>>> translate will grow at reasonable pace, not a huge drop of stuff to
>>> translate from a day to day.
>>
>> Our concerns here, with Olivier and the few of us not doing localization
>> for OOo any more, is that the localization will be done by someone else,
>> may be a professional agency. Most of the time the quality is very very
>> low because the agencies know nothing about the product where we work
>> with it and localize it since years. So, no matter the amount of
>> strings, if we are sure of the consistency and we do not have to
>> research in the files to ensure it. Currently there is a little more
>> than 6000 new/fuzzy words until DEV300m90, it's not so much and even
>> less if we have a long deadline ;)
>
> Ah, maybe I understand now ;-)  So of course, it is up to you to define
> if you want to have the translations merged from the OOo tree to the LO
> tree for 3.4, or not.  I understand it that you'd prefer not to, ie.
> l10n repo (containing the localize.sdf's) untouched by the merges from
> OOo, right?

That was what I was not sure about: all the new features and bug fixes
for OOo will be merged to the LO tree for 3.4.

In that case yes, we want the l10n repo merged and containing all the
new features or fixes strings from OOo. And the sooner the better
whatever the amount of strings :-)
So that means that we can extract the strings from the last OOoDEV and
merge them with our LO file to have the complete (UI+HC2) set of strings
up to date until now?

Thanks to you and your patience Kendy :)
Kind regards
Sophie
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Jan Holesovsky Jan Holesovsky
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

LO Pootle

In reply to this post by sophi
Hi Sophie,

Thank you for all the explanations! :-)

On 2010-12-29 at 21:00 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:

> This is now two/three months that we didn't touch the files because we
> do not have them in the LO Pootle repository and we are not working any
> more on the OOo Pootle repository. So some teams have now a fair amount
> of issues to fix in their files, that will take time and resources, and
> we need to have the complete set of files in the LO Pootle repository
> for that.

I see, OK.  What is at the moment blocking the import of the content of
the OOo Pootle into the LO Pootle, please?  Just some missing tooling,
or the decision of what is the source for the translations & how to
organize them?

On 2010-12-29 at 21:00 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:

> > Ah, maybe I understand now ;-)  So of course, it is up to you to define
> > if you want to have the translations merged from the OOo tree to the LO
> > tree for 3.4, or not.  I understand it that you'd prefer not to, ie.
> > l10n repo (containing the localize.sdf's) untouched by the merges from
> > OOo, right?
>
> That was what I was not sure about: all the new features and bug fixes
> for OOo will be merged to the LO tree for 3.4.

Most probably we won't be merging everything, which might cause trouble
when merging the localizations as a whole :-(

> In that case yes, we want the l10n repo merged and containing all the
> new features or fixes strings from OOo. And the sooner the better
> whatever the amount of strings :-)
> So that means that we can extract the strings from the last OOoDEV and
> merge them with our LO file to have the complete (UI+HC2) set of strings
> up to date until now?

Based on what you wrote, I think for LO master (towards-3.4), the best
would be to extract all the strings from the current git repositories
(ie. from the LO master branch, not from OOoDEV) to have the complete
set (so that it would look similar to what is in the OOo Pootle now, but
based on LO sources), and msgmerge the translations from OOo and from
lo-build.po.  That way, it would be easy to merge updated translations
from OOo later (should there be any), while still having the LO strings
as the base.  Or are there reasons not to do that?

BTW - would it help you if we got rid of the sdf files, and instead we
had .po files in the l10n git repository?  [For sure it would help us
who work with the git repos, because the sdf file format is just
something incredibly terrible for version control.]  Would you be able
to merge directly from the OOo Pootle, or from .po files produced by
that, or do you still need .sdf for part of your workflow?

Regards,
Kendy

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Andras Timar Andras Timar
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] LO Pootle

2010.12.30. 1:05 keltezéssel, Jan Holesovsky írta:

> BTW - would it help you if we got rid of the sdf files, and instead we
> had .po files in the l10n git repository?  [For sure it would help us
> who work with the git repos, because the sdf file format is just
> something incredibly terrible for version control.]  Would you be able
> to merge directly from the OOo Pootle, or from .po files produced by
> that, or do you still need .sdf for part of your workflow?

Hi,

Assumption: translate-toolkit can convert translatable content back and
forth without loss of information.

I believe this assumption is true. Translate-toolkit has been used for a
long time by many teams. My suggestion is that all l10n teams should use
Pootle to submit their translations. This does not mean that they must
use Pootle to translate. They can use Pootle, offline PO editing tools,
xliff, or edit sdf file directly - it does not matter. However at the
end translations must be uploaded to Pootle in .po format. Pootle - with
a git back-end - will contain the "master" copy of translations.

English sdf file should be produced regularly for Pootle update. l10n
repository will be obsolete. Build should take .po files from git
(Pootle back-end) and generate localized sdf files build-time.

Problems:

1. How to import existing LibreOffice translations to Pootle?

l10n repository contains monolingual (and sometimes outdated) sdf files.
We can export up-to-date bilingual (en-US + translated) sdf files from
the source, but we cannot make a difference between untranslated strings
and strings that are intentionally same as en-US (URLs, code, function
names, language names etc.). Sun stored translations in a database (not
public) and they kept track of this information - this cannot be
extracted from the source.

2. How to merge translations from OpenOffice.org?

I think it should be decided individually for each language team.
Automatic merge should happen for only those languages that do not have
LibreOffice translators. Of course technical support should be provided
for all. Translators don't need to understand the technical details. I
think members of this list have the knowledge, we can put together a
good process.

Please let me know what you think.

Regards,
Andras

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Aron Xu Aron Xu
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] LO Pootle

In reply to this post by Jan Holesovsky
+1 for choosing .po over .sdf or .xliff, the number of tools designed
to edit and/or manage .po files is much more than the other two
formats AFAIK.

--
Regards,
Aron Xu
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Lior Kaplan Lior Kaplan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] LO Pootle



On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Aron Xu <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for choosing .po over .sdf or .xliff, the number of tools designed
to edit and/or manage .po files is much more than the other two
formats AFAIK.

+1

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Martin Srebotnjak Martin Srebotnjak
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] LO Pootle

The Slovenian team will be working with sdf files (we have our own localization system that works with sdf, splits to po-s and finalizes back to sdf), so -1 from me.

Lp, m.

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Martin Srebotnjak Martin Srebotnjak
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] LO Pootle

Please bear in mind, that while working just with po's in Pootle might be a great idea, but for teams not using Pootle sdf (or zipped po files) is the only way to go. Or will you take one by one po file from our ftp sites for automatic building of builds?

Lp, m.

2010/12/30 Martin Srebotnjak <[hidden email]>
The Slovenian team will be working with sdf files (we have our own localization system that works with sdf, splits to po-s and finalizes back to sdf), so -1 from me.

Lp, m.


_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
sophi sophi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LO Pootle

In reply to this post by Jan Holesovsky
Hi Kendy,
On 30/12/2010 03:05, Jan Holesovsky wrote:

> Hi Sophie,
>
> Thank you for all the explanations! :-)
>
> On 2010-12-29 at 21:00 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:
>
>> This is now two/three months that we didn't touch the files because we
>> do not have them in the LO Pootle repository and we are not working any
>> more on the OOo Pootle repository. So some teams have now a fair amount
>> of issues to fix in their files, that will take time and resources, and
>> we need to have the complete set of files in the LO Pootle repository
>> for that.
>
> I see, OK.  What is at the moment blocking the import of the content of
> the OOo Pootle into the LO Pootle, please?  Just some missing tooling,
> or the decision of what is the source for the translations&  how to
> organize them?

I think we have kept the file "LO only" for the 3.3, because we didn't
have any process and we were not sure of who will admin, take care of
every thing or even participate ;).
We have had several members of our team able to take care of the Pootle
server, of updating the files and pushing them into the sources (and BTW
thanks a lot for their work, I'm proud to belong to this family :-) Also
we get now a large number of teams participating to LO l10n.
So now that 3.3 translation is almost over, I think we need to go
further and have a complete process in place again. Hence my questions
here ;-)

>
> On 2010-12-29 at 21:00 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:
>
>>> Ah, maybe I understand now ;-)  So of course, it is up to you to define
>>> if you want to have the translations merged from the OOo tree to the LO
>>> tree for 3.4, or not.  I understand it that you'd prefer not to, ie.
>>> l10n repo (containing the localize.sdf's) untouched by the merges from
>>> OOo, right?
>>
>> That was what I was not sure about: all the new features and bug fixes
>> for OOo will be merged to the LO tree for 3.4.
>
> Most probably we won't be merging everything, which might cause trouble
> when merging the localizations as a whole :-(

yes, that might cause problems.

>
>> In that case yes, we want the l10n repo merged and containing all the
>> new features or fixes strings from OOo. And the sooner the better
>> whatever the amount of strings :-)
>> So that means that we can extract the strings from the last OOoDEV and
>> merge them with our LO file to have the complete (UI+HC2) set of strings
>> up to date until now?
>
> Based on what you wrote, I think for LO master (towards-3.4), the best
> would be to extract all the strings from the current git repositories
> (ie. from the LO master branch, not from OOoDEV) to have the complete
> set(so that it would look similar to what is in the OOo Pootle now, but
> based on LO sources), and msgmerge the translations from OOo and from
> lo-build.po.  That way, it would be easy to merge updated translations
> from OOo later (should there be any), while still having the LO strings
> as the base.  Or are there reasons not to do that?

I don't see any issue, proceeding from our branch may be the best way,
you're right. Others, do you see any issue with your process if we
proceed as Kendy proposed?
>
> BTW - would it help you if we got rid of the sdf files, and instead we
> had .po files in the l10n git repository?  [For sure it would help us
> who work with the git repos, because the sdf file format is just
> something incredibly terrible for version control.]  Would you be able
> to merge directly from the OOo Pootle, or from .po files produced by
> that, or do you still need .sdf for part of your workflow?

Provided we answer Andras points and Martin question, for me it's ok.
Also, we need to make sure that the teams working with xliff files are
happy too.
L10n teams, if you see something missing or wrong for you, please do not
hesitate to raise your voice as Martin did. We are discussing and having
all the issues in the hand at the beginning is always a better way to go ;)

Kind regards
Sophie
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Jan Holesovsky Jan Holesovsky
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] LO Pootle

In reply to this post by Martin Srebotnjak
Hi Martin,

On 2010-12-30 at 10:36 +0100, Martin Srebotnjak wrote:

> The Slovenian team will be working with sdf files (we have our own
> localization system that works with sdf, splits to po-s and finalizes
> back to sdf), so -1 from me.

What exactly your system that works with sdf does?  Is it available
somewhere?  [Public git/svn/hg/cvs?]  From what you described above, you
work with po's in the end, so I am somehow missing the point of
insisting on sdf ;-)

Thank you,
Kendy

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Jan Holesovsky Jan Holesovsky
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-l10n] LO Pootle

In reply to this post by Andras Timar
Hi Andras,

On 2010-12-30 at 09:13 +0100, Andras Timar wrote:

> > BTW - would it help you if we got rid of the sdf files, and instead we
> > had .po files in the l10n git repository?  [For sure it would help us
> > who work with the git repos, because the sdf file format is just
> > something incredibly terrible for version control.]  Would you be able
> > to merge directly from the OOo Pootle, or from .po files produced by
> > that, or do you still need .sdf for part of your workflow?
>
> Assumption: translate-toolkit can convert translatable content back and
> forth without loss of information.

Yes, I assume the same thing :-)

> I believe this assumption is true. Translate-toolkit has been used for a
> long time by many teams. My suggestion is that all l10n teams should use
> Pootle to submit their translations. This does not mean that they must
> use Pootle to translate. They can use Pootle, offline PO editing tools,
> xliff, or edit sdf file directly - it does not matter. However at the
> end translations must be uploaded to Pootle in .po format. Pootle - with
> a git back-end - will contain the "master" copy of translations.

Sounds great to me.

> English sdf file should be produced regularly for Pootle update. l10n
> repository will be obsolete. Build should take .po files from git
> (Pootle back-end) and generate localized sdf files build-time.
>
> Problems:
>
> 1. How to import existing LibreOffice translations to Pootle?
>
> l10n repository contains monolingual (and sometimes outdated) sdf files.
> We can export up-to-date bilingual (en-US + translated) sdf files from
> the source, but we cannot make a difference between untranslated strings
> and strings that are intentionally same as en-US (URLs, code, function
> names, language names etc.). Sun stored translations in a database (not
> public) and they kept track of this information - this cannot be
> extracted from the source.

I think that with a simple heuristic, we might get quite good results:

- if there exists a language that has a translation => mark the string
as not translated
- if there no translation in any language, mark as fuzzy; it probably is
an URL or something

We can play a bit with the % of languages that have the translation for
the fuzzy / not translated at all split; I hope it might work reasonably
well.

> 2. How to merge translations from OpenOffice.org?
>
> I think it should be decided individually for each language team.
> Automatic merge should happen for only those languages that do not have
> LibreOffice translators. Of course technical support should be provided
> for all. Translators don't need to understand the technical details. I
> think members of this list have the knowledge, we can put together a
> good process.

Sounds good to me.

Thank you,
Kendy

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Next » 12