Re: [documentation-dev] wiki organisation , docs and native language
Hi, sophie wrote: Hi Alex, all, Alex Thurgood wrote: Frank Peters a écrit : Hi Frank, - Switching languages in the wiki should be an easy thing provided we agree on one common schema: o the localized pages sit in a defined hierarchy so URLs to switch languages are easily generated automatically o the localized pages need to have the same names. With the new MW version (which we currently test and hopefully implement soon) it will be possible to still use localized *titles* to show up. Just the URL is the same (except for the language identifier). That's about all we need. If we implement a language bar as template a user would be able to o switch to another language with one click o instantly see if a localization is available or not, and if not, start localizing right away o add languages easily by just adding them to the template I personally agree with this approach. It makes for something very systematic, simple and user friendly. If I want to see something in EN, FR, DE, or ES or JP or ZH all I'd have to do is switch those letters in the URL to get the corresponding (or not yet translated) document. I agree also with you and Franck, and I think the wiki is a good tools for our documentation purpose. I'll see to draft something and send it out to NLC for discussion after I returned (I guess I promised that several times before, bear with me...) Well there's a discussion ongoing in the French NLC doc project, because as you can imagine, following a schema that you have outlined here would require us to change a lot. Unfortunately, there appears to be no general consensus as yet. Yes, and we have to get to a concensus quite quick now, because more and more link are pointing to the wiki in the OLH. One of the fears is that a French lambda user, who couldn't care less about docs in other languages, would find themselves faced with lots of links leading nowhere, or to a document in English only, and thus would lose interest in the doc site as a valuable source of information. While I don't share this fear, I can understand it. I imagine that it could be very frustrating indeed. The issue is also that, if you're looking for help pressing F1 in the product, it's because you need it right now for the task you're doing. It's different than going to the documentation site because you want to learn about a fonctionnality or a task. You'll be less frustrated if you find only English help in the last case. Another point made was that such a schema would automatically make all our docs redundant overnight, since we would be forced to rewrite everything to conform to a given baseline documentation, no doubt written in English. I tend to disagree here too. I think that the whole point of setting up a system like the wiki for the doc project is to allow for creativity from the various language groups to become visible in a single place, thereby furthering exchanges with other groups and stimulating people to translate the work of others. It recognizes that each language culture has its specificities, including the way in which computer software is used. For example, in Europe, we have different constraints for billing and invoicing (European Directives) than those used in the US (and no doubt elsewhere). This means that any documentation about say, the report generator, or Base module, that expounds on a billing system, would have to be adapted to suit each country's or region's own requirements. The French NLC doc project has created some general user documentation, of course, but some of it also reflects the way French people think in general, or are taught to think in school (cartesian thinking). This tends to display itself more in the way the documentation is written, than in actual content. I remember one of my former French bosses telling me that he couldn't understand how my thought processes worked because I wasn't cartesian enough, yet I came to much the same conclusions in my writings as he did :-) It also makes for a bit of a nightmare when you have to translate things from French to English, and I've been doing this now for nearly 20 years !!! Thanks for pointing that again Alex :) I don't think that we should rewrite everything just because it exists in English and we have quite the same in French. I think that this is up to the NLC documentation teams to evaluate what is relevant to translate, to rewrite or to adapt. The difficulty is to stay in harmony with the main documentation site and the links... Plus the new users forum will provide also documentation, all that have to be organized and linked in the best way for our users (and I remember Gianluca Turconi saying too much of a thing kill the thing ;). So we also have to take to not too much overload our users with material, if it's possible. Anway, enough of my prattling, I'm sure Sophie can fill you in with more details should you require them. Thanks for your prattling Alex,
[documentation-dev] Wiki/website license for OOo templates
Hello *, I'm crossposting this message to dev@documentation.openoffice.org and [EMAIL PROTECTED] because I'm not sure which list (if any) is the right one for it. Recently (2007/12/01), The Italian community has started a new project here: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Modelli in order to provide OOo templates written in our native language that can be used, modified and distributed by any user/distributor for whatever purpose (business, private, educational ones, and so on). Hence, we've excluded many templates that are, for example, freeware or for which we cannot know who the author is because he/she is not mentioned anywhere. However, since the beginning, we've found several issues that are related to the OOo Wiki/website licensing system. For the Wiki, they are being already discussed here: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=73421 while for OOo templates directly hosted inside the documentation project http://documentation.openoffice.org/Samples_Templates/index.html the issue is slightly different. In fact, according to the Policies and Terms of Use page http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html, section 4.c, all materials posted on OOo website, included those documents/templates whose author is not expressly mentioned, are granted under: ***Quotation*** a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others. ***End of Quotation*** So my question is: if I don't know who owns the intellectual property rights to reproduce... of such a template because that person is not mentioned anywhere, can I quote the hosts (which one?) as my or other translators' sublicenser under the TUPPCP, section 4.c terms? In a easier way: can I write (c) 2007, Sun Microsystem Inc., released under TUUPCP, section 4.c terms and conditions on a package that includes such templates? This solution seems possible according to TUPPCP 4.d section (Moral Rights), but I'd like to have a specific endorsement to do this action. Any suggestion/clarification is welcomed. Regards, Gianluca -- http://www.letturefantastiche.com/ Letture Fantastiche - Acquisto e lettura gratuita di libri o racconti di fantascienza, fantasy, noir, horror, narrativa storica o allostorica e altro, legato al genere fantastico. Nel sito ufficiale dell'autore Gianluca Turconi sono disponibili opere anche di altri scrittori. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
