On 25 sept. 06, at 17:38, Eugeniy Meshcheryakov wrote:
There is also problem for translators, they cannot work in usual way,
more of them understand English than Esperanto.
Which is obviously not the issue here. The issue is: how to allow
translators to work with the gettext tools from a language other than
English. It is not a request to put all the source messages in
Esperanto.
Also, thinking that English is a panacea on a i18n list is quite a
non-orthodox opinion.
What about the problem of non English native developers and of
English developers who don't know how to properly write documentation
and who produce strings in something they believe is English when it
mostly is not the case.
I'd rather have non English native developer write documentation in
their native language or a language they feel comfortable with, and
have that translated to other languages.
Most probably the result would be much better than having to
translate poor English in the first place.
As for the comment about double translation in another post, it is
quite presumptuous since it assumes that:
1) the original English is clear and written with translation in mind
2) the first translator is sloppy and not able to produce an
equivalent of the original language, or rather that the _translation_
process itself worsens the value of the original so that whatever the
efforts of the translators are, the resulting language will always be
inferior to the original. This is clearly silly.
Jean-Christophe Helary
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
