Le 2010-10-19 11:17, Jean-Christophe Helary a écrit :
On 20 oct. 10, at 00:05, Marc Paré wrote:
I was under the impression that we were all in agreement, that the "lingua
franca" of the mailists is English and that localized mailists were to encourage
users to contribute in their own language.
I think that is a mistaken view of the issues at hand.
There should be English specific lists so that English speakers can contribute
in English to whatever issue they have.
We need to have strict formal equality between linguistic communities for the
TDF/LibO to be really based on a democratic process.
Then, there should be global lists where global discussions take place. Such
lists would obviously gather a less important number of involved people and
could be a place where multilingual information is exchanged. Sanitizing
everything through English when most contributors are not English natives is
not a realistic approach.
Therefore, we should then make sure that information/issues from the localized
mailists is passed on to the main English mailist through either the mailist
moderator or some ambassador/spokesperson to the localized mailists to assure
the flow of information to the SC or appropriate decision making group.
This is totally unrealistic and reduces the contribution of non English
speakers to the filter of their spokeperson when no filtering takes place for
English speakers.
Maybe we should work on improving the process of the reporting of localized
groups' concerns to the main English mailists.
No. The problem is to ensure that there is a good signal/noise ratio on
supposedly global lists and whatever S/N ratio on language specific lists.
We do not have to reproduce the English based corporate structure of Sun/Oracle
in TDF. This is a thing of the past.
Jean-Christophe Helary
----------------------------------------
fun: http://mac4translators.blogspot.com
work: http://www.doublet.jp (ja/en> fr)
tweets: http://twitter.com/brandelune
Hmmm... then, the fact remains that a multilingual mailist model will
always be difficult to accomplish. The amount of energy spent on
translating from one language to another would certainly affect the
overall effectiveness of the group. Satisfying everyone will be difficult.
Using one's common sense, using a language that is common to all groups
should be the defining factor here. The english language fits all of the
requirements of a unifying, common language. You only need to look at
larger international groups where if they meet the common communication
language is English -- UN and its affiliates etc. Yes they do provide
translation but the language by default for all their organisation is
the English language (lingua franca).
Trying to satisfy every language possible on earth in discussion groups,
IMHO is unrealistic. Unfortunately, the reality of the situation, is,
that for any large international group, the participating members need
to find a working language to make their organisation work at its best.
At this point in time, it is English. Maybe in the future is will be
Cantonese. It is all a matter of convenience.
BTW ... my mother tongue is French (Canadian)
Marc
--
E-mail to [email protected] for instructions on how to
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
