On Sa, 2006-09-02 at 21:48 +0930, Clytie Siddall wrote: > Hi everyone :) > > This evening I'm indulging myself by translating some OOo files on > the Wordforge Pootle server. > > I really do notice the difference after using the older Pootle used > by the CC project: with the new version, the terminology is really > helpful, the double-click edit saves time, and the automatic > recognition of interface language from your browser really makes you > feel at home. > > No negative comment on CreativeCommons: I enjoyed using their Pootle, > and I hope they will get as much out of the newer version as I do. :) > > I was impressed by the combination of the terminology file (which > present suggestions based on the original string) and the search-in- > file feature. Vocabulary changes and grows, and on one or two > occasions, I noticed that the terminology file for my language was > suggesting translations that weren't quite up-to-date (my fault, > nobody else's). All I needed to do was open another tab with the > terminology file, Search for that term, and I could update it. Three > clicks, bar entering the string. > > And next time that term came up as a suggestion, it was current. I > love live update. :) >
Thank you Clytie for wonderful feedback. I'm glad that the terminology is indeed as useful as we thought it would be. I already improved the terminology matching and the next version should already be a little bit better at recognising terms. > This brings me to a suggestion: how difficult would it be for us to > _add_ to the terminology file? > Very easy for the administrator of the terminology project. You can simply upload a new file with the added terminology. Unfortunately you can't add directories easily, although the directory structure of an uploaded ZIP file might work (haven't tried). If you add many files, though, I would expect it to slow down things a bit. We should try it out to find the limits. > I haven't been editing for long this evening, but already I've > noticed repeated terms which aren't covered by the terminology file, > but usefully could be. For example, the terminology file covers Point > and Break, but not Breakpoint, which is not exactly Point+Break. It > would be terrific if we could add a term to the terminology file as > easily as we can edit one. > > Do you think it would be viable? Just for that file: we don't want > people adding original strings to PO files! > > As part of the TM function, we could have Add Term... ;) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Translate-pootle mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/translate-pootle
