Thanks for your message Jonathan, good to know that there is some support and 
activity for the KDE en_GB language.  I do think that aacid's observation was 
a bit pessimistic, with a missing en_GB translation being nowhere near as 
serious as, say, a missing CJK one.  But it is certainly worth having 
completeness as far as the user can tell, my original motivation for starting 
to work on the Kooka translations was getting tired at seeing "color" or 
"gray" standing out like the proverbial sore thumb in the UI...

I hadn't considered the proofreading aspect of the en_GB work, but it is 
definitely a good idea - there are some strings that I've noticed that don't 
look right even in worldwide English.  How does the process work? - do we have 
carte blanche to jump in and change these wherever they may appear, or via the 
normal bug/review process?

I could certainly help out (what time permits) with any en_GB work that is 
needed, so I will join the mailing list and keep an eye on it.  If there is a 
published list of tasks or areas that are intended to be addressed, then of 
course I will follow that.  Your mailing list not being @kde.org confused me, 
I had assumed that there must be one for en_GB but was not sure where to find 
it!

Best regards,
  Jonathan




On Tuesday 12 Nov 2013 09:35:19 Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 09:21:04AM +0000, Jonathan Marten wrote:
> > Maybe part of the reason for this is unique to that language: most
> > strings will not actually need translating, and a missing translation
> > will still be readable to a British English user.  I'm guessing that
> > many users will just accept it, and will not go to the trouble of
> > raising a bug report just because there is one instance of "color" in
> > an application.  So, in a way, en_GB is a victim of its own
> > similarity.
> 
> en_GB does badly need more people to work on it.  There's a mailing list if
> you want to help out http://lists.quaker.eu.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-en-gb
> 
> The purpose of the en_GB translation is both to satisfy those of us
> who are snobby about our spelling but also to act as proofreaders for
> the whole of KDE strings.  For this reason you can't just script any
> changes but you do have to look at every string to check if there's
> any typos of grammar that can be improved.  Once you get into it you
> can become very efficient and the large majority are straight copies,
> but there's no point in accepting it without first checking so it's
> right not to ship en_GB while it's below the acceptable threshold.
> 
> Jonathan

-- 
Jonathan Marten                         http://www.keelhaul.demon.co.uk
Twickenham, UK                          jjm2@keelhaul.demon.co.uk