Rosetta-Feedback - UDS Prague

[Danilo Šegan]

Hi Kenneth,

On Saturday at 16:04, Kenneth Nielsen wrote:

>> > Furthermore it is also very time consuming to review and approve
>> > suggestions. I don't see a real speedup compared to writing them on my
>> > own. Especially since there is no way to provide feedback to the
>> > translators in Rosetta. If there is no contact outside of Rosetta I have
>> > to correct the same errors again and again.
>>
>> I believe the lack of documentation is to blame here.  Reviewing
>> suggestions would not speed you up short-term, but once you have
>> reviewed enough of someone's translations and start considering him a
>> good translator, you'd make him a reviewer as well, and then it would
>> be two of you translating, and two of you reviewing.
>
>
> I disagree. I believe it is the process currently involved that is the
> principal source of the time used reviewing, reviewing _can_ be done in a
> manner that takes less time per string than you would use translating it
> your self, so getting more people to review would simply mean more people
> wasting time.

I think you are missing one important point.  A "reviewer" can also
submit translations without waiting for them to be reviewed.

I.e. by reviewing someone's translations, you are aiming for a new
'trusted' translator as well.  So, now it'll be two guys who can
translate directly, and if that doesn't speed you up long-term, I
don't know what will.

As Sebastian pointed out though, we need to improve the process, and
improve the documentation.


Mark also had a nice idea of having a review-template (containing
common terms, constructions, and problematic cases). Reviewers
would point people at it, prospective translators would provide their
translations, and reviewers could easily evaluate their translation
abilities.  If only somebody would spend time preparing such a POT file :)

Cheers,
Danilo