Hi all, OK ... this one's for the Web Site group and the Documentation Group. In bug 953, MJ requests that we setup a better translator's page complete with links to the latest .po files. Here's an example: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/community/translation Paul then pointed me to his site which is running on Kartouche, a communal translation tool: http://bureau.paulpoulain.com/kartouche/ Given the fact that many translators aren't going to be very tech savvy, I think we should make Koha translation web-based. That is, we should have a site where translators can go, setup a login, assign themselves a translation project, run the .po to get the English, and insert their language in text fields hitting submit when they are done ... so paul, can Kartouche facilitate this? Is there another software app that can? -- Joshua Ferraro VENDOR SERVICES FOR OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE President, Technology migration, training, maintenance, support LibLime Koha ILS, Mambo Intranet, DiscrimiNet Filter jmf@liblime.com | Full Demos at http://liblime.com | 1(888)KohaILS
Joshua Ferraro <jmf@liblime.com> wrote:
Given the fact that many translators aren't going to be very tech savvy, I think we should make Koha translation web-based. That is, we should have a site where translators can go, setup a login, assign themselves a translation project, run the .po to get the English, and insert their language in text fields hitting submit when they are done ... so paul, can Kartouche facilitate this? Is there another software app that can?
I'm a bit puzzled why you would send questions for paul to a public mailing list, so I'll throw my two pen'orth in anyway: some translators will be comfortable working with the .po files themselves, some will be working as part of a larger translation project and some would be helped by a translation web site like you suggest. A web site won't work well for a translator who is paying by the minute for internet access. In short, I think we've got to support all three of these scenarios - and probably more besides. On a related note, shall I modify the installer to generate translated templates from .po files at install-time? Then we need to keep one template language in CVS and the .po files too. I'm not sure how much of a common vocabulary there is yet, but I guess that's another thing I get to test Real Soon Now. -- MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
On 5/31/05, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
Joshua Ferraro <jmf@liblime.com> wrote:
Given the fact that many translators aren't going to be very tech savvy, I think we should make Koha translation web-based. That is, we should have a site where translators can go, setup a login, assign themselves a translation project, run the .po to get the English, and insert their language in text fields hitting submit when they are done ... so paul, can Kartouche facilitate this? Is there another software app that can?
I'm a bit puzzled why you would send questions for paul to a public mailing list, so I'll throw my two pen'orth in anyway: some translators will be comfortable working with the .po files themselves, some will be working as part of a larger translation project and some would be helped by a translation web site like you suggest. A web site won't work well for a translator who is paying by the minute for internet access.
In short, I think we've got to support all three of these scenarios - and probably more besides.
On a related note, shall I modify the installer to generate translated templates from .po files at install-time?
Then we need to keep one template language in CVS and the .po files too. I'm not sure how much of a common vocabulary there is yet, but I guess that's another thing I get to test Real Soon Now.
There are two well known web translation tools: Pootle by translate.org.za Rosetta by Canonical (funders of Ubuntu) Thus I would say, rather than setting up your own web portal, make use of these existing ones. Corey
Corey Burger <corey.burger@gmail.com> wrote:
There are two well known web translation tools: Pootle by translate.org.za
http://pootle.wordforge.org/ is slow to me. We might want to download the code and set up our own edition anyway. If we're doing that, why Pootle not Kartouche? Look at both.
Rosetta by Canonical (funders of Ubuntu)
This is faster, although I'm still nervous about having it on a server unconnected with koha.
Thus I would say, rather than setting up your own web portal, make use of these existing ones.
Kartouche exists, is well-known and we know it can do the job "for real", as was shown by translating much of KDE into Welsh in 100 days (K mewn gant). I also know the maintainer and have worked with him before. If the koha project wants, I will support the code and ask to become an upstream developer. Equally, if people want to work with Pootle or Rosetta or something else, I'd like to see that be accommodated. -- MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ http://www.ttllp.co.uk/koha/
MJ Ray a écrit :
Corey Burger <corey.burger@gmail.com> wrote:
There are two well known web translation tools: Pootle by translate.org.za
http://pootle.wordforge.org/ is slow to me. We might want to download the code and set up our own edition anyway. If we're doing that, why Pootle not Kartouche? Look at both.
I give a try to pootle on my computer. Some pro & some cons when compared to kartouche. The main pro being, imho, that it has recent version where kartouche is old & seems unmaintained. I did some hack on kartouche to add features, send a mail to the project leader, but got no answer. Another pro for pootle : seems to be happy with any char encoding where kartouche is 1 only (unicode by default, i changed it to iso8859-1 for french translation) A big pro for kartouche (according to me) : it's written in PHP, that I know, while pootle is in python that i don't know at all Note also i have some problems with kartouche : * when importing > exporting .po files, I sometimes get differences between original version & imported > exported one * it seems kartouche don't handle fuzzy Let's continue investigating. -- Paul POULAIN Consultant indépendant en logiciels libres responsable francophone de koha (SIGB libre http://www.koha-fr.org)
Paul POULAIN <paul.poulain@free.fr> wrote:
The main pro being, imho, that it has recent version where kartouche is=20 old & seems unmaintained. I did some hack on kartouche to add features,=20 send a mail to the project leader, but got no answer.
Was that email back in September last year? I thought I forwarded his apology to you. Have you tried again?
Another pro for pootle : seems to be happy with any char encoding where=20 kartouche is 1 only (unicode by default, i changed it to iso8859-1 for french translation)
Shouldn't we be using utf-8 everywhere now? (In any case, iso8859-1 doesn't contain the euro symbol, so shouldn't be used for France.)
Note also i have some problems with kartouche : * when importing > exporting .po files, I sometimes get differences between original version & imported > exported one
What sort of differences?
* it seems kartouche don't handle fuzzy
That's more of a problem.
Let's continue investigating.
Of course! -- MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ http://www.ttllp.co.uk/koha/
MJ Ray a écrit :
Paul POULAIN <paul.poulain@free.fr> wrote:
The main pro being, imho, that it has recent version where kartouche is=20 old & seems unmaintained. I did some hack on kartouche to add features,=20 send a mail to the project leader, but got no answer. Was that email back in September last year? I thought I forwarded his apology to you. Have you tried again?
No, I don't remember getting any mail from you about this. Anyway, september was the birth of my 3rd son, so I may have forgotten, I had more importants things to think ;-) Anyway, the last version of kartouche was in 2003, september, that's not a busy software ;-)
Another pro for pootle : seems to be happy with any char encoding where=20 kartouche is 1 only (unicode by default, i changed it to iso8859-1 for french translation) Shouldn't we be using utf-8 everywhere now? (In any case, iso8859-1 doesn't contain the euro symbol, so shouldn't be used for France.) right, it's iso8859-15. And about utf-8, no, we still are not unicode.
Note also i have some problems with kartouche : * when importing > exporting .po files, I sometimes get differences between original version & imported > exported one What sort of differences? Let's continue investigating. Of course!
I'll do another campaign of translation for 2.2.3, i'll tell here my exact problems. -- Paul POULAIN Consultant indépendant en logiciels libres responsable francophone de koha (SIGB libre http://www.koha-fr.org)
That's an interesting option, but please leave an option for those of use who can use the .po files to download them. The hurdle I ran into was that I only wanted the gettext files themselves, not to install anything needed to extract them in the first place, only what was needed to actually translate. -Lars Quoting Joshua Ferraro <jmf@liblime.com>: [snip]
Given the fact that many translators aren't going to be very tech savvy, I think we should make Koha translation web-based. That is, we should have a site where translators can go, setup a login, assign themselves a translation project, run the .po to get the English, and insert their language in text fields hitting submit when they are done ... so paul, can Kartouche facilitate this? Is there another software app that can?
---------------------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through L-secure: http://www.l-secure.net/
On 7/26/05, lars@rovaniemelainen.com <lars@rovaniemelainen.com> wrote:
That's an interesting option, but please leave an option for those of use who can use the .po files to download them. The hurdle I ran into was that I only wanted the gettext files themselves, not to install anything needed to extract them in the first place, only what was needed to actually translate.
For the record, Rosetta is about to be released under a free license and does allow the ability to download all the various translation files (.po, etc.) from the webinterface. Corey
Corey Burger <corey.burger@gmail.com> wrote:
For the record, Rosetta is about to be released under a free license
Good. Please advertise it when it is free software, not before. I know of other software which "is about to be" released under a free licence for years now. Maybe they get the good press, then forget? -- MJ Ray (slef)
participants (5)
-
Corey Burger -
Joshua Ferraro -
lars＠rovaniemelainen.com -
MJ Ray -
Paul POULAIN