Return to Blitz-L
From: blitz-l-bounces@xxxxxx On Behalf Of Don Osborn
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 12:40 PM
To: martin.benjamin@xxxxxx; aep@xxxxxx
Cc: blitz-l@xxxxxx; panafril10n@xxxxxx; louise@xxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Blitz-l] which L10n projects to pursue?
Hi all, and apologies for the slow reply. In terms of choosing and prioritizing software for localization and indeed development of resources to support localisation, it might help to work from a list. Such a list need not be hierarchical (i.e., not a step by step path) and does not include background info such as Alberto provides, but it would give a kind of overview and working template for all to refer to.
When I got to know the PAN L10n project better I noted that they had a table of categories of software and tools and where each country was with them. It was evident that different countries (most fosing on one main language) had different priroities, or at least had different connfigurations of where they were.
I adapted this table for languages on the PanAfriL10n.org wiki and have a test version of it that I need to finish and inntegrate into the contents. See: http://www.panafril10n.org/wikidoc/pmwiki.php/PanAfrLoc/AfrikaansLocalisation2 . By organizing info in this way, one can see the progress and gaps.
Noting Martin's suggestion re other kinds of software, one could include a row for that in the table.
Other suggestions for additions or changes in the table would be appreciated.
On the specific question of which software, is TuxPaint too simple? One advantage of localizing that in various African languages is that it could be promoted as a free add-on for ICT4E / computers in schools projects, ICT4D telecenters, and indeed among African expatriates.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Benjamin On Behalf Of Martin Benjamin
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:06 AM
> To: aep@xxxxxx
> Cc: Don Osborn; louise@xxxxxx; 'paa kwesi imbeah'; blitz-l@xxxxxx; panafril10n@xxxxxx; 'Adel El Zaim'
> Subject: which L10n projects to pursue?
> Dear All,
> Alberto raised an important point about OpenOffice being a "moving
> target" that could be too large to take on immediately within the
> proposed framework. What do you think about his suggestion that we
> instead choose a number of smaller FOSS projects to localize? Which
> software would you choose, and why?
> Alberto's link (http://www.it46.se/entry/235) shows that OOo has
> about 72,000 terms that need to be translated (including many repeats),
> and the total jumps to almost 1/2 million if you include the Help files!
> His estimate also puts the timeframe at about three years (with just one
> person working per language) and a total of $3,000,000 to complete full
> OOo L10n for 20 languages - so it sounds like a full OOo push might be
> too ambitious for the current proposal.
> The off-the-wall draft of the proposal was thinking of OOo because it is
> well-known and extremely useful. However, there are many other great
> free software programs out there that we could focus on instead, and/or
> we could seek to bring OOo to a basic level for each language. One
> advantage of working on multiple small projects is that we will probably
> find a lot of core terminology that is repeated over and over, so much
> of the work can benefit from this efficiency - as Don said, we will be
> building tools and standards that will be useful beyond the scope of a
> single project, so we might as well maximize the advantage of those
> standards for our own outputs.
> So: WHAT SOFTWARE WOULD YOU LIKE TO INCLUDE IN AN L10n
> PROPOSAL? Why is this software useful? And, if you know or can find
> the answers, how many strings does it contain? How many words?
> How widely used?
> Please send any thoughts that you have on this topic, so we can include
> a better list of L10n projects in the next round of the proposal.
> Alberto Escudero-Pascual wrote:
> > - OpenOffice.org is a moving target for a three years project, getting
> > OOo in 20 languages, it is not a realistic result of the project as a
> > big part of the effort after glossary developent and
> > internationalization/localization tricks in the code ends in
> > "localization muscle" and "technology building/review effort". I suggest
> > a multi-cycle approach, either building smaller softwares like Abiword
> > or gaim, or being able to localize OpenOffice.org to certain level of
> > strings (main GUI), and enable the community to continue the work.
> > My experience (Dwayne can problably add here) it is that a full
> > localization of OpenOffice.org to local language will require a budget
> > between 100-150 KUSD and 30-40 p-m (person-month). I rather old post of
> > the number of strings of 2.0.x is here:
> > http://www.it46.se/entry/235
> > In brief, the project should define a software (as in executable
> > results) strategy. I beleive that the strategy depends on the vision of
> > the project: concrete tangible results, building communities, etc.
> > Finnaly, a few localization marathons using PALDO should be planned.
> > /aep
> > On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 14:02 -0400, Don Osborn wrote:
> >> 4) PALDO, like other genres of localization efforts, share some tools and
> >> standards. Examples include orthographies and input methods (keyboard
> >> layouts etc.). How can PALDO and other projects (IDRC-funded or not) and
> >> various agencies collaborate and communicate about development and
> >> implementation of common solutions? PALDO thus may find itself in the
> >> position of making decisions that affect development of broader standards.
Blitz-l mailing list