[VOTE INSIDE] The docs translation "problem"

[Sveinn í Felli]

- D -

But IMHO the optimal feature, as someone using a language with too 
limited resources to translate any documentation, would be to have the 
opportunity to add to the docs a reasonable list/glossary of 
terms/translations used in the UI, just to help those who are used to 
the localized interface find the corresponding terms in the docs.

Been thinking about it for around 15 years, guess some more time won't 
hurt... ;-)

Best regards,
Sveinn í Felli


Þann 15.11.2024 16:01, skrifaði Albert Astals Cid:
> 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
> 
>