Internalisation and Rosetta "Lost In Translation"

Jonathon Blake jonathon.blake at
Thu Jan 20 20:02:04 CST 2005

Hassan wrote:

> Open Source and Internalisation is going no where if the data is becoming redundant.

There are three basic approaches to L10N.

a) Random individuals translate random projects. No localization,
other than translation of the User Interface gets done.

b) Projects have set up L10N Teams/Guidelines to _localize_ the
software for the region that the target language is used in.  The L10N
provides code fixes for bugs/issues for that language, as well as user
documentation, and marketing the software in the appropriate
geographical regions.

c) A L10N Project is formed with the idea of providing a complete
desktop, or server or whatever in the target language, and for a
target geographical region.

> Can some people from GNOME, KDE, DEBIAN, REDHAT etc, 

a)  Explain why projects should change their _existing_ L10N project
guidelines, when those guidelines work for them?

Especially when:
a) Rosetta is an unproven translation portal.  
b) The sponsor of Rosetta is a commercial competitor [ Red Hat,
Debian, Mandrake, etc.]

I am going to raise the licensing issue here.  

i) Who owns the copyright to the translated data? 
ii) What happens when the terms of that copyright conflict with that
of a project?

Other issues:

i) Why should existing L10N portals shunt translation to Rosetta (or
any other web based translation tool) when they can incorporate a
similar tool into their toolbox for use by their existing L10N project

ii) What happens when an L10N Team for a project announces that all
Rosetta translations will be rejected? [One L10N Team has announced
that position.]

iii) What happens when a project announces that all Rosetta
translations will be rejected?

>we should have a central location for translations, 

What are the problems with the _existing_ Pre-Rosetta days locations
for translation?

>this will allow everybody who has a browser and a knowledge  of a
language to translate and support the community.

I'll reiterate my position on that.  A minimum of 80% of the people
who apply for a translation spot on an L10N team should be rejected.

> Otherwise we are just becoming redundant and "lost in translation"

Is Rosetta able to support languages such as Miami, Alabama, and Ontario? 


Monolingualism is a curable disease.
                               Carlos Fuentes

More information about the rosetta-users mailing list