User talk:Siebrand: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
(darn, too used to Lqt - I don't sign anymore.) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:::Doesn't make sense. The feature was developed so that a stable version is marked and offered for translation. Meanwhile, the source page can be changed as often as desirable, and will only affect the translators, when the latest version is marked for translation again. This is only acceptable of course if you allow the source page to have a later/less stable content than the translations. | :::Doesn't make sense. The feature was developed so that a stable version is marked and offered for translation. Meanwhile, the source page can be changed as often as desirable, and will only affect the translators, when the latest version is marked for translation again. This is only acceptable of course if you allow the source page to have a later/less stable content than the translations. | ||
:::Because all translators can currently mark pages and version for translation, that'll be hard to reach, but I suggested yesterday on IRC to separate the translator right and the 'mark for translation' right, so this cannot occur. | :::Because all translators can currently mark pages and version for translation, that'll be hard to reach, but I suggested yesterday on IRC to separate the translator right and the 'mark for translation' right, so this cannot occur. [[User:Siebrand|siebrand]] 19:55, 10 June 2010 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 17:55, 10 June 2010
Hi Siebrand.
Have You seen the discussion about changes to pages after translation on Talk:Translation_Workflow? As a translator, I really appreciate You effort to make links easier to handle, but it also creates some problems right now. I am not sure if it a good idea to make these changes to pages, that have allready been marked for translation. Personally, I would prefer that such changes were only made to pages, that haven't been marked for translation (and I suspect, that others with many pages allready translated might agree), but of cause I can see the advantage to new translators.
Please don't take this as a criticism. If You find, that on balance it is better to go ahead with the changes, I am OK with that.--Claus chr 18:55, 10 June 2010 (CEST)
- Hi Claus, I'm one of the developers of the Translate extension, and I'm working with Anne and Ingo on IRC to work out the kinks. The changes I made are bound to happen, so rather sooner (with few translations and few fuzzy markings) than later, with many translations.
- If I might make a suggestion myself: start out with fewer pages to be translated, because the volume you're putting in now will lead to a lot of overhead for translators if you find out that big changes have to be made to the current pages for translation. siebrand 19:42, 10 June 2010 (CEST)
- One possibility might be to mark up a page for translation, then copy it to pagename/stable - would that be possible? If it is, it would mean that the translators could stay with the stable version (and certainly the docbook people will need to) while updates are being done. Or maybe tackle it the opposite way around - copying to a _dev page for additions. I think that may work better. One way or another, I think a stable/unstable way would solve many of the problems. Opinions? --annew 19:49, 10 June 2010 (CEST)
- Doesn't make sense. The feature was developed so that a stable version is marked and offered for translation. Meanwhile, the source page can be changed as often as desirable, and will only affect the translators, when the latest version is marked for translation again. This is only acceptable of course if you allow the source page to have a later/less stable content than the translations.
- One possibility might be to mark up a page for translation, then copy it to pagename/stable - would that be possible? If it is, it would mean that the translators could stay with the stable version (and certainly the docbook people will need to) while updates are being done. Or maybe tackle it the opposite way around - copying to a _dev page for additions. I think that may work better. One way or another, I think a stable/unstable way would solve many of the problems. Opinions? --annew 19:49, 10 June 2010 (CEST)
- Because all translators can currently mark pages and version for translation, that'll be hard to reach, but I suggested yesterday on IRC to separate the translator right and the 'mark for translation' right, so this cannot occur. siebrand 19:55, 10 June 2010 (CEST)