> This announcement about translating kde gui with Translatewiki feels stra=
nge
> to me similar to the announcements about gui translation via rosetta/irma=
 +
> and launchpad years ago (and both miserable failed btw.).

If I recall correctly, the reasons of it's failling where: a)not being
=ABupstream=BB, i.e. only for ubuntu, b) quality on the long term going
down.

> Discussions about translation workflow/concepts/tools should happen here,
> not
> on a irc channel.

Absolutely agree.

> * the concept and workflow online/offline

> * how to sync online/offline translation?
> There should be only one source of translations used/shipped with kde.

 Please replace =ABshould=BB to =AB shall =BB.

Add: That only source shall be the one translators are working
against, either online or offline.

> * which teams want to use a wiki translation and what are there needs to
> deal
> with them. Note: Afaik most (all?) teams on launchpad do not use the kde =
gui
>
> translation in launchpad, because kde is translated here and they simply
> could
> not handle/deal/proofread with the kde gui translation suggestions in
> lauchpad.

As far as I know, this is because as the free operatives systems focus
went appart of ubuntu, translation teams began to realize that
rosseta's translations where "ghetto translations", and then there
happened an upstreamization of their focus.

The issues with not being able to "handle/deal/proofread with the kde
gui translation suggestions in [a given online translation tool]" is
not specific... and has it's roots in designing tools with criteria
for a computer aidet translation tool slightly outdated. I mean:
centered around the text to be translated, while to get fast,
consistent, translations the tool should be focused on easing the
usage os translation memories, glossaries, ortography and grammar
checkers, etc.
(well, in general the kind of things any book on translation memories
talk about)

> * nothing beats specialized offline translation tools like
> Localize/Pology/etc
> and scripty's workflow in terms of translation efficiency and quality

Yes, posieve is simply great.

> * in translation consistency is the only thing that *really* matters.
> A goal really hard to achieve, even in a team using default translations,=
 a
>
> glossary and style rules, how should this be done by someone stepping onc=
e
> by
> chance into german translation via a wiki/web interface online?

Good point, harder to attain if the online interface is not designed
arount memories but being a specialized editor.

> * judging from translations provided by people stepping into the de team
> mailinglist just once and saying they know our default translations and
> german
> translation style rules I would simply ignore any translation via
> wiki/online
> from them as a waste of my time.

Then block online work.

> </german translators hat on>
>
> --
> Burkhard L=FCck
>