Terms Table / ROS Wiki

[Aleksey Bragin]

        Hello,
we have two ways to setup Terms Translations Tables.
1. Every language group coordinator maintains such a table in some format,
say, XML. People who are actually doing translation use it, and if they want
to add an entry to the table - they send email to the language coordinator,
he adds this term to the table, marks it as not-approved, asks other people
to approve this term, and if it's correct, mark it as approved. Everytime
this XML table should be available from somewhere for download.

2. Use ReactOS Wiki for this purpose. I have tried to create links from
Translation page to tables for three languages, and tried to add some
content into Russian table page, but I couldn't find how to add a table into
Wiki. Does our Wiki support tables?
This way all people will have access to the table, can add entries by
themselves (but we rely on them marking the term unapproved first, and only
then, when all other translators agree to the term, it's marked as
approved), and language coordinator manages this process.


I need your opinion about this, what would be the most comfortable way to do
this? I like Wiki idea, but I can't create a good table in it, and I don't
want to substitute tables with lists.


With the best regards,
Aleksey Bragin.

[Mark IJbema]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 02:10:27PM +0300, Aleksey Bragin wrote:
>           Hello,
>  we have two ways to setup Terms Translations Tables.
>  1. Every language group coordinator maintains such a table in some format,
>  say, XML. People who are actually doing translation use it, and if they want
>  to add an entry to the table - they send email to the language coordinator,
>  he adds this term to the table, marks it as not-approved, asks other people
>  to approve this term, and if it's correct, mark it as approved. Everytime
>  this XML table should be available from somewhere for download.
>  
>  2. Use ReactOS Wiki for this purpose. I have tried to create links from
>  Translation page to tables for three languages, and tried to add some
>  content into Russian table page, but I couldn't find how to add a table into
>  Wiki. Does our Wiki support tables?
>  This way all people will have access to the table, can add entries by
>  themselves (but we rely on them marking the term unapproved first, and only
>  then, when all other translators agree to the term, it's marked as
>  approved), and language coordinator manages this process.
>  
>  
>  I need your opinion about this, what would be the most comfortable way to do
>  this? I like Wiki idea, but I can't create a good table in it, and I don't
>  want to substitute tables with lists. 
It shouldn't be approved within the language group only. For instance:
'you' <-- how to translate this? Using the formal 'U'/'Sie' or
using the
informal 'jij'/'du', no matter what choice is made, it has to be
consistent over the various translations (so not 'u' in dutch and 'du'
in german).

I'm against using the Wiki, since not everyone should be able to change
it imho. Changes of this table should be coordinated very delicately.

Mark

Aleksey Bragin wrote:

>          Hello,
> we have two ways to setup Terms Translations Tables.
> 1. Every language group coordinator maintains such a table in some format,
> say, XML. People who are actually doing translation use it, and if they want
> to add an entry to the table - they send email to the language coordinator,
> he adds this term to the table, marks it as not-approved, asks other people
> to approve this term, and if it's correct, mark it as approved. Everytime
> this XML table should be available from somewhere for download.
>
> 2. Use ReactOS Wiki for this purpose. I have tried to create links from
> Translation page to tables for three languages, and tried to add some
> content into Russian table page, but I couldn't find how to add a table into
> Wiki. Does our Wiki support tables?
> This way all people will have access to the table, can add entries by
> themselves (but we rely on them marking the term unapproved first, and only
> then, when all other translators agree to the term, it's marked as
> approved), and language coordinator manages this process.
>
>
> I need your opinion about this, what would be the most comfortable way to do
> this? I like Wiki idea, but I can't create a good table in it, and I don't
> want to substitute tables with lists.
>
>
> With the best regards,
> Aleksey Bragin.
>
>   
>  
They both have advantages and disadvantages:
The advantage of 1 is to have things suited to the language need, 
everyone can make their own xml document that best serves their purposes.
2. has the advantage of having things central, and Mark IJbema is 
strongly for such an option. It doesn't really matter for me though.

Emil

[Mark IJbema]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 04:51:59PM +0100, ROS(a)Q-collective.org wrote:
>   Aleksey Bragin wrote:
>  
> >         Hello,
> > we have two ways to setup Terms Translations Tables.
> > 1. Every language group coordinator maintains such a table in some format,
> > say, XML. People who are actually doing translation use it, and if they 
> > want
> > to add an entry to the table - they send email to the language coordinator,
> > he adds this term to the table, marks it as not-approved, asks other people
> > to approve this term, and if it's correct, mark it as approved. Everytime
> > this XML table should be available from somewhere for download.
> >
> > 2. Use ReactOS Wiki for this purpose. I have tried to create links from
> > Translation page to tables for three languages, and tried to add some
> > content into Russian table page, but I couldn't find how to add a table 
> > into
> > Wiki. Does our Wiki support tables?
> > This way all people will have access to the table, can add entries by
> > themselves (but we rely on them marking the term unapproved first, and only
> > then, when all other translators agree to the term, it's marked as
> > approved), and language coordinator manages this process.
> >
> >
> > I need your opinion about this, what would be the most comfortable way to 
> > do
> > this? I like Wiki idea, but I can't create a good table in it, and I don't
> > want to substitute tables with lists.
> >
> >
> > With the best regards,
> > Aleksey Bragin.
> >
> >  
> >  
>  They both have advantages and disadvantages:
>  The advantage of 1 is to have things suited to the language need, 
>  everyone can make their own xml document that best serves their purposes.
>  2. has the advantage of having things central, and Mark IJbema is 
>  strongly for such an option. It doesn't really matter for me though. 
I'm for having things central, but against anarchism. I think the lists
should be available central, and maintained central, but not on a wiki.
The advantage of some standard format is that it's easy to merge the
lists, check which languages haven't defined what words, check if the
translations are consistent, etc (maybe having it in some central
database would be even better).

Mark

[Aleksey Bragin]

Then we reject Wiki idea, since I tend to become to dislike Wiki idea, since
we won't have any ways of managing users.

Which format of storage of Terms Table do you (people) prefer then? I would
be glad to use either Word (2003, storing data in XML) or Excel, but this
packages aren't free.

Maybe AbiWord? I tried it, and it seems to perform well, especially I like
its alreay gzipped files.


With the best regards,
Aleksey Bragin.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark IJbema" <mark(a)ijbema.xs4all.nl>
To: <ros-general(a)reactos.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 8:27 PM
Subject: Re: [ros-general] Terms Table / ROS Wiki


>   I'm for having things central, but against
> anarchism. I think the lists
>  should be available central, and maintained central, but not on a wiki.
>  The advantage of some standard format is that it's easy to merge the
>  lists, check which languages haven't defined what words, check if the
>  translations are consistent, etc (maybe having it in some central
>  database would be even better).

[Mark IJbema]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 08:57:28PM +0300, Aleksey Bragin wrote:
>   Then we reject Wiki idea, since I tend to become to
> dislike Wiki idea, since
>  we won't have any ways of managing users.
>  
>  Which format of storage of Terms Table do you (people) prefer then? I would
>  be glad to use either Word (2003, storing data in XML) or Excel, but this
>  packages aren't free.
>  
>  Maybe AbiWord? I tried it, and it seems to perform well, especially I like
>  its alreay gzipped files. 
If we would use some standard, easy to manage formate, we could easily
manipulate it. My proposal would b something like this:

<translateword>
<word language="english">you</word>
<word language="dutch">jij</word>
<word language="german">du</word>
</translateword>

since this is extendable. We could for instance make to files
seperately:

<translateword>
<word language="english">you</word>
<word language="dutch">jij</word>
</translateword>

<translateword>
<word language="english">you</word>
<word language="german">du</word>
</translateword>

and merge them. We'd need an easy xml editor though.

Mark

PS. please quote the message and reply under it.

[Robert Köpferl]

>   lists, check which languages haven't defined what
> words, check if the
>  translations are consistent, etc (maybe having it in some central
>  database would be even better). 
I vote for Database Management System.
One littel scirpt can export lists or whatever and user management is 
gratis.

>   
>  Mark
>  _______________________________________________
>  ros-general mailing list
>  ros-general(a)reactos.com
>  http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-general

[Tobias Ussing]

i second that, since a word by word translation would never work well enough..

and with a very simple interface/layer, everytext in ROS could be stored in a 
db, so that "file" should only be translated once, and all programs could get 
the text from the same place.

db über alles.

Sincerly
Tobias Ussing
On Thursday 19 February 2004 21:04, Robert Köpferl wrote:
> >   lists, check
> > which languages haven't defined what words, check if the
> >  translations are consistent, etc (maybe having it in some central
> >  database would be even better). 
>  I vote for Database Management System.
>  One littel scirpt can export lists or whatever and user management is
>  gratis.
>
> >   Mark
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  ros-general mailing list
> >  ros-general(a)reactos.com
> >  http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-general 
>  _______________________________________________
>  ros-general mailing list
>  ros-general(a)reactos.com
>  http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-general

[Mark IJbema]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 09:13:21PM +0100, Tobias Ussing wrote:
>   i second that, since a word by word translation would
> never work well enough..
>  
>  and with a very simple interface/layer, everytext in ROS could be stored in a 
>  db, so that "file" should only be translated once, and all programs could get 
>  the text from the same place. 
We'd still need a list of certain words though to keep consistency. For
instance, all 'you'-s should be either translated to 'du' or 'Sie'
in
german, but not to 'du' sometimes, and 'Sie' some other time.

Mark