From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 20 17:10:58 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70407393; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 17:10:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E9EF2E20; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 17:10:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id r7KHAp60097290; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 11:10:51 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) with ESMTP id r7KHAppQ097287; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 11:10:51 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 11:10:51 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block To: Gabor Pali Subject: Re: Updating translation workflow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 20 Aug 2013 11:10:51 -0600 (MDT) Cc: "doc@FreeBSD.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 17:10:58 -0000 On Tue, 20 Aug 2013, Gabor Pali wrote: > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Warren Block wrote: >> Well, yes, but this appears to be manual and does not automatically >> translate the same strings that are found in other documents. That is part >> of what the newer automated systems do. > > Erm, I am a bit skeptic about this as nouns (and expressions) in > Hungarian may be conjugated; inserting them into a sentence would > require one to understand the original context of the word -- that is, > if some automated system could translate those words in case of such a > language, no humans would be required any more at all... :-) I would think translations of larger strings ("This is an example of a FreeBSD system") would override translations of smaller strings ("FreeBSD"). But it's not clear, and a test would help. Certainly it can be made to work. Other large projects are using these systems, with a lot of content translated. Because of the translation database, rewrites or massive edits would force the translators to start over.