Paul W. Frields
stickster at gmail.com
Wed May 6 18:46:21 UTC 2009
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 12:50:03PM +1000, Ruediger Landmann wrote:
> Noriko Mizumoto wrote:
>> Instead, how about having the language list first and each language is
>> linked to the translators list? So that, for example, clicking
>> 'Spanish' will take the user to the list of Spanish translators with
>> year by skipping all other long listed language translators lists.
> That would certainly work (and would spare translators from having to
> translate the "(translator - language)" string again every time a new
> translator contributed to the project. On the other hand, it would make
> the list much longer (because of the extra headings that it would
> require; in the case of the Installation Guide, it would add 35
> subheadings, many with only one name in them).
>> If "H.1. Contributors" section can be separate xml file and write
>> access to this file is allowed,
> Section H ("Contributors and production methods") is a separate XML file
> in the original source, but H.1 could certainly be separated from the
> rest of the appendix.
> Even easier, if we were to use the separate subheadings approach, each
> language subheading could be a separate XML file. However, whether it's
> one XML file, or many separate XML files, translators would need to be
> able to commit changes directly to the repo, which I don't think they can
> do right now? Otherwise, they will need to send the updated XML file to
> someone who does have commit access; but in that case, it would be easier
> to just ask that person to make the change themselves.
>> then it can be maintained by translators without annoying the author.
> This is the real crux of the matter. I can't speak for anyone else, but
> for me, updating the list of credits for people who've volunteered their
> time and effort to do work on the book is not in any way "annoying" --
> it's an honour.
> Making sure that people get the credit that they've earned is one of the
> few ways that those of us maintaining these books can say "thank you" to
> the translators for their time and effort.
> I've also seen a suggestion that the list of translators should be cut
> down to only show the translators who worked on one particular
> translation of the book. For example, the version of the book in, say,
> Latin would only credit the people who translated it into Latin and none
> of the other translators would get any credit at all in that version. I
> would hate to see that happen, for the same reason I've just given.
> Whether or not a translator has contributed to *your* particular
> language, that person has still made an extremely valuable contribution
> to the project, and should be acknowledged. That's what it means to be
> part of a community, right?
> Just my personal opinion, of course.
Just to be clear here, I agree 100%. But in the same way, without
tighter process on translation notices I would be more worried that a
maintainer would *inadvertently* leave someone out, which creates a
bad situation without anyone meaning harm. Maintainers are free to
help with the maintenance of a colophon but we should always seek to
make the load spreadable. That's what it means to be scalable! ;-)
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
More information about the Fedora-trans-list