[i18n] Internationalization project
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On the Jakarta General list, we've been discussing the possibility of introducing an Internationalization project into incubation. It seems the consensus is that it should be targeted for a top-level programming-language-independent and spoken-language-independent Apache project, rather a Jakarta subproject. (To anyone on the JG list: I used a blind CC so that this is the only message on [EMAIL PROTECTED] which should be CCd to JG. You can set up message filters on [i18n] on both lists to follow the discussions in either place) A preliminary organization of the project based on the JG discussions is included in my message below. I don't mind spearheading the incubation myself. Is there anyone else interested whom we can add to the list of contributors (see A through F below)? Is there anything else we should consider before requesting entry into incubation? TIA. Robert Simpson Original Message Subject: Re: [i18n] Internationalization subproject sponsor? Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:32:36 +0100 From: robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Monday, July 7, 2003, at 01:14 PM, Robert Simpson wrote: snip I am surprised there isn't more interest in a common internationalization framework within Jakarta. But then I have been assuming that there are non-English-speaking members in Jakarta, not just committers and other users of the code. i think that there several jakarta members who are not native english speakers. as Tetsuya Kitahata pointed out there are far fewer members than committers and i'm not sure whether there are any jakarta members who are native speakers of non-latin languages. it takes a lot of energy to spearhead an incubation and it's a big commitment for a member to make. but i don't think that the member would have to come from jakarta (even if that's where those people involved with the product hope that it will end up). i wonder whether you might have more luck finding a sponsor over in xml-land. since many of their products are multi-language a common i18n framework may be of more pressing importance than here. i also have an idea that there are members whose native languages are non-latin. i like the idea of an apache wide i18n project along the lines suggested by Tetsuya Kitahata. - robert Original Message Subject: Re: [i18n] Internationalization subproject Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:55:00 -0400 Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] WRT Santiago's point about keeping the different translations in sync, the solution is to have each word/phrase in (1) or each section in (2) identified in the XML with a version number. Then it would be a simple matter to have a program compare the two documents, and indicate where the translation needs to be updated (the program could even provide an initial translation of the section via machine translation, to be refined by the human translator). The XML should also indicate who made each change and whether a change was prompted by a need to change the document (additions to content, for example) or as a translation of another version. That way, no particular translation would have to be the primary document, and any conflicts could be identified and handled. For example, a Spanish-speaking person could add a missing section to the Spanish translation of a document, and that section could then be translated back into the original and other translations. This arrangement could also handle proposed additions (the XML equivalent of I, a Spanish translator, propose to add a new section here), which could be commented on (ex: that section would be better placed over there) and/or voted on by translators of other languages, etc Am I getting the feeling right that the Internationalization project would be ultimately targeted for a top level, multiple-programming-language Apache project? If so, I think the best approach would be to get the Java support done first, to demonstrate its viability and usefulness. But still, from the start, the intent should be to design with language-independence as the ultimate goal. So, in summary, the organization of the project would be: 1. code common to both (1) and (2) 1.1 code This would include any code that supports both (2) and (3), such as the code to do comparisons between translations 1.1.1 any programming-language-neutral stuff (configuration files, XML, etc) 1.1.2 Java 1.1.2.1 source code 1.1.2.1.1 source code contributors (committers) 1.1.3+ other programming languages, similarly 2. user interface internationalization (words and phrases) 2.1 code This would include the code to generate
Re: [i18n] Internationalization project
-1 this would exclude possible interested international folks. We should keep the discussion on a list open to everyone! On 7/14/03 2:21 AM, Robert Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On the Jakarta General list, we've been discussing the possibility of introducing an Internationalization project into incubation. It seems the consensus is that it should be targeted for a top-level programming-language-independent and spoken-language-independent Apache project, rather a Jakarta subproject. (To anyone on the JG list: I used a blind CC so that this is the only message on [EMAIL PROTECTED] which should be CCd to JG. You can set up message filters on [i18n] on both lists to follow the discussions in either place) A preliminary organization of the project based on the JG discussions is included in my message below. I don't mind spearheading the incubation myself. Is there anyone else interested whom we can add to the list of contributors (see A through F below)? Is there anything else we should consider before requesting entry into incubation? TIA. Robert Simpson Original Message Subject: Re: [i18n] Internationalization subproject sponsor? Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:32:36 +0100 From: robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Monday, July 7, 2003, at 01:14 PM, Robert Simpson wrote: snip I am surprised there isn't more interest in a common internationalization framework within Jakarta. But then I have been assuming that there are non-English-speaking members in Jakarta, not just committers and other users of the code. i think that there several jakarta members who are not native english speakers. as Tetsuya Kitahata pointed out there are far fewer members than committers and i'm not sure whether there are any jakarta members who are native speakers of non-latin languages. it takes a lot of energy to spearhead an incubation and it's a big commitment for a member to make. but i don't think that the member would have to come from jakarta (even if that's where those people involved with the product hope that it will end up). i wonder whether you might have more luck finding a sponsor over in xml-land. since many of their products are multi-language a common i18n framework may be of more pressing importance than here. i also have an idea that there are members whose native languages are non-latin. i like the idea of an apache wide i18n project along the lines suggested by Tetsuya Kitahata. - robert Original Message Subject: Re: [i18n] Internationalization subproject Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:55:00 -0400 Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] WRT Santiago's point about keeping the different translations in sync, the solution is to have each word/phrase in (1) or each section in (2) identified in the XML with a version number. Then it would be a simple matter to have a program compare the two documents, and indicate where the translation needs to be updated (the program could even provide an initial translation of the section via machine translation, to be refined by the human translator). The XML should also indicate who made each change and whether a change was prompted by a need to change the document (additions to content, for example) or as a translation of another version. That way, no particular translation would have to be the primary document, and any conflicts could be identified and handled. For example, a Spanish-speaking person could add a missing section to the Spanish translation of a document, and that section could then be translated back into the original and other translations. This arrangement could also handle proposed additions (the XML equivalent of I, a Spanish translator, propose to add a new section here), which could be commented on (ex: that section would be better placed over there) and/or voted on by translators of other languages, etc Am I getting the feeling right that the Internationalization project would be ultimately targeted for a top level, multiple-programming-language Apache project? If so, I think the best approach would be to get the Java support done first, to demonstrate its viability and usefulness. But still, from the start, the intent should be to design with language-independence as the ultimate goal. So, in summary, the organization of the project would be: 1. code common to both (1) and (2) 1.1 code This would include any code that supports both (2) and (3), such as the code to do comparisons between translations 1.1.1 any programming-language-neutral stuff (configuration files, XML, etc) 1.1.2
Re: [i18n] Internationalization project
i personally think that this is an issue that needs to be discussed both inside and outside. andrew is right there needs to be a discussion involving anyone outside apache with opinions and experience they'd be willing to contribute but i also agree with taking part of the discussion to [EMAIL PROTECTED] not only do the issues raised cut across projects but also unless some members step up and offer leadership, this project will never get off the ground. - robert On Monday, July 14, 2003, at 02:50 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: -1 this would exclude possible interested international folks. We should keep the discussion on a list open to everyone! On 7/14/03 2:21 AM, Robert Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On the Jakarta General list, we've been discussing the possibility of introducing an Internationalization project into incubation. It seems the consensus is that it should be targeted for a top-level programming-language-independent and spoken-language-independent Apache project, rather a Jakarta subproject. (To anyone on the JG list: I used a blind CC so that this is the only message on [EMAIL PROTECTED] which should be CCd to JG. You can set up message filters on [i18n] on both lists to follow the discussions in either place) A preliminary organization of the project based on the JG discussions is included in my message below. I don't mind spearheading the incubation myself. Is there anyone else interested whom we can add to the list of contributors (see A through F below)? Is there anything else we should consider before requesting entry into incubation? TIA. Robert Simpson Original Message Subject: Re: [i18n] Internationalization subproject sponsor? Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:32:36 +0100 From: robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Monday, July 7, 2003, at 01:14 PM, Robert Simpson wrote: snip I am surprised there isn't more interest in a common internationalization framework within Jakarta. But then I have been assuming that there are non-English-speaking members in Jakarta, not just committers and other users of the code. i think that there several jakarta members who are not native english speakers. as Tetsuya Kitahata pointed out there are far fewer members than committers and i'm not sure whether there are any jakarta members who are native speakers of non-latin languages. it takes a lot of energy to spearhead an incubation and it's a big commitment for a member to make. but i don't think that the member would have to come from jakarta (even if that's where those people involved with the product hope that it will end up). i wonder whether you might have more luck finding a sponsor over in xml-land. since many of their products are multi-language a common i18n framework may be of more pressing importance than here. i also have an idea that there are members whose native languages are non-latin. i like the idea of an apache wide i18n project along the lines suggested by Tetsuya Kitahata. - robert Original Message Subject: Re: [i18n] Internationalization subproject Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:55:00 -0400 Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] WRT Santiago's point about keeping the different translations in sync, the solution is to have each word/phrase in (1) or each section in (2) identified in the XML with a version number. Then it would be a simple matter to have a program compare the two documents, and indicate where the translation needs to be updated (the program could even provide an initial translation of the section via machine translation, to be refined by the human translator). The XML should also indicate who made each change and whether a change was prompted by a need to change the document (additions to content, for example) or as a translation of another version. That way, no particular translation would have to be the primary document, and any conflicts could be identified and handled. For example, a Spanish-speaking person could add a missing section to the Spanish translation of a document, and that section could then be translated back into the original and other translations. This arrangement could also handle proposed additions (the XML equivalent of I, a Spanish translator, propose to add a new section here), which could be commented on (ex: that section would be better placed over there) and/or voted on by translators of other languages, etc Am I getting the feeling right that the Internationalization project would be ultimately targeted for a top level, multiple-programming-language Apache project? If so, I think the best approach would be to get the Java support done first, to
Re: [i18n] Internationalization project
In my plan this gets delayed until Tetsuya qualifies for membership ;-) -Andy On 7/14/03 4:37 PM, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i personally think that this is an issue that needs to be discussed both inside and outside. andrew is right there needs to be a discussion involving anyone outside apache with opinions and experience they'd be willing to contribute but i also agree with taking part of the discussion to [EMAIL PROTECTED] not only do the issues raised cut across projects but also unless some members step up and offer leadership, this project will never get off the ground. - robert On Monday, July 14, 2003, at 02:50 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: -1 this would exclude possible interested international folks. We should keep the discussion on a list open to everyone! On 7/14/03 2:21 AM, Robert Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On the Jakarta General list, we've been discussing the possibility of introducing an Internationalization project into incubation. It seems the consensus is that it should be targeted for a top-level programming-language-independent and spoken-language-independent Apache project, rather a Jakarta subproject. (To anyone on the JG list: I used a blind CC so that this is the only message on [EMAIL PROTECTED] which should be CCd to JG. You can set up message filters on [i18n] on both lists to follow the discussions in either place) A preliminary organization of the project based on the JG discussions is included in my message below. I don't mind spearheading the incubation myself. Is there anyone else interested whom we can add to the list of contributors (see A through F below)? Is there anything else we should consider before requesting entry into incubation? TIA. Robert Simpson Original Message Subject: Re: [i18n] Internationalization subproject sponsor? Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:32:36 +0100 From: robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Monday, July 7, 2003, at 01:14 PM, Robert Simpson wrote: snip I am surprised there isn't more interest in a common internationalization framework within Jakarta. But then I have been assuming that there are non-English-speaking members in Jakarta, not just committers and other users of the code. i think that there several jakarta members who are not native english speakers. as Tetsuya Kitahata pointed out there are far fewer members than committers and i'm not sure whether there are any jakarta members who are native speakers of non-latin languages. it takes a lot of energy to spearhead an incubation and it's a big commitment for a member to make. but i don't think that the member would have to come from jakarta (even if that's where those people involved with the product hope that it will end up). i wonder whether you might have more luck finding a sponsor over in xml-land. since many of their products are multi-language a common i18n framework may be of more pressing importance than here. i also have an idea that there are members whose native languages are non-latin. i like the idea of an apache wide i18n project along the lines suggested by Tetsuya Kitahata. - robert Original Message Subject: Re: [i18n] Internationalization subproject Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:55:00 -0400 Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] WRT Santiago's point about keeping the different translations in sync, the solution is to have each word/phrase in (1) or each section in (2) identified in the XML with a version number. Then it would be a simple matter to have a program compare the two documents, and indicate where the translation needs to be updated (the program could even provide an initial translation of the section via machine translation, to be refined by the human translator). The XML should also indicate who made each change and whether a change was prompted by a need to change the document (additions to content, for example) or as a translation of another version. That way, no particular translation would have to be the primary document, and any conflicts could be identified and handled. For example, a Spanish-speaking person could add a missing section to the Spanish translation of a document, and that section could then be translated back into the original and other translations. This arrangement could also handle proposed additions (the XML equivalent of I, a Spanish translator, propose to add a new section here), which could be commented on (ex: that section would be better placed over there) and/or voted on by translators of other languages,
