On 16 March 2013 15:01, Luigi Toscano <luigi.toscano@tiscali.it> wrote:
> I would say that this is the best place to discuss this, and where all th=
e
> discussiong, including gathering of requirements from translation teams,
> should have happened in the first place.
>
> I don't care if some teams want to use the online interface. Similarly, i=
t's
> nice to be able to export translations for offline operation, but it's no=
t
> enough. The translations from the wiki should integrate with the exiting =
workflow.

[...]

> If those points are addressed, some teams can decide to use a combination=
 of
> translation systems or use only one, but the central point of information=
 will
> be useful for everyone and we can discuss about extending support. And I =
guess
> that's also the reason (the lack of those features and the concerns writt=
en
> down above) why some teams do not see this wiki-based translation as a go=
od
> thing (it simply "landed").

Are you now talking about translation of documentation at UserBase?
Your reply doesn't make sense to me otherwise.

I am happy to also help with issues with UserBase translations
together with the KDE webteam, but that is a different topic.

My proposal is about translating the software interface strings at
translatewiki.net (a website). Both UserBase and translatewiki.net use
the Translate extension of MediaWiki.

  -Niklas


--
Niklas Laxstr=C3=B6m