[VOTE INSIDE] The docs translation "problem"

[Zayed Al-Saidi]

I vote for D.

في الجمعة، ١٥ نوفمبر ٢٠٢٤، ١١:٤٩ م Matjaž Jeran <matjaz.jeran at amis.net> كتب:

> I vote for D
>
> But I would like to open the next problem.
> I tried to compile the doc without committing it to repository. If there
> were some errors in this procedure, I found it quite difficult to find the
> exact location of the error in .po file. I would also suggest to improve
> error diagnostics.
>
> Best regards
> Matjaž
>
> Dne petek, 15. november 2024 ob 17:01:23 Srednjeevropski standardni čas je
> Albert Astals Cid napisal(a):
> > Right now docs need to be generated manually by translators/team
> coordinators
> > and commited to the docs/ folder.
> >
> > This is something we don't communicate a lot and I'm sure some teams
> don't do
> > that, not your fault.
> >
> > Also it's relatively "easy" to commit broken docs that will break the
> > application compilation (again not your fault again, the tooling is a
> bit
> > fragile).
> >
> > One of the things we were discussing with Luigi is to automate the docs
> > compilation process.
> >
> > Everyone likes automation, so that's a good thing, BUT there is a
> "problem",
> > which is why we offloaded the compilation to humans in the first place.
> >
> > The problem is that our current system, a particular documentation needs
> to be
> > translated to 100% to be properly converted into an usable doc.
> >
> > The easy solution is to remove a doc once it stops compiling, but that
> doesn't
> > seem very optimal/fair because a single sentence would cause the doc to
> be
> > removed and my understanding is that it's better to have a doc somewhat
> old
> > doc translated than one with 0% translated.
> >
> > The other easy solution is never to remove a doc even if it fails to
> compile,
> > this can cause that the documentation gets SUPER OLD and then maybe it's
> not
> > better to have a SUPER OLD translated documentation compared to a non
> > translated documentation.
> >
> > The middle ground (which is what we do with GUI messages) is to always
> > generate the docs and if a particular string is missing use the English
> > version of the string, this way we always have the newest documentation,
> as
> > much translated as possible.
> >
> > The middle ground of the middle group is fill missing translations with
> > English but only if the translated percentage is bigger than say 75%
> >
> > I think collectively want to move towards an automated system so we
> should
> > adopt one of the 4 solutions described above (or if you have another
> magically
> > perfect solution we have not thought about please say so).
> >
> > PLEASE VOTE:
> >
> > Which automatic solution do you prefer?
> >
> > A) Remove translated documentation once they are not 100% translated
> >
> > B) Keep previously 100% translated documentation once current version is
> not
> > 100% translated
> >
> > C) Use English text for non translated strings when generating
> translated
> > documentation
> >
> > D) Use English text for non translated strings when generating
> translated
> > documentation but only if translated strings are > 75%, otherwise remove
> the
> > translated documentation and use the English one.
> >
> > I think I would vote for C, but I'm not really a translator nowadays so
> I'm
> > not sure my vote counts.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >   Albert
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-i18n-doc/attachments/20241116/e118a8d8/attachment.htm>