Re: Status of Authorized Translation of WCAG2 to Dutch

Hi,

I don't like being the guy who spoils the party, especially after all 
the hard work that has been done on the translation. But since I put 
a lot of time and effort into contributions to WCAG 2 itself, I find 
the correct representation of its content very important.

I have checked the 220 comments that I submitted to the Dutch WCAG 2 
translation in December 2009 
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-auth-trans-nl/2009Dec/0001.html>. 
Below are a few comments that have not been addressed or not been 
addressed correctly. Issue g is the most important one. In my 
opinion, it is even a showstopper for an authorised translation.


In normative content (Glossary:

a. "general flash and red flash thresholds"
   <http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/#general-thresholddef> /
   <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#general-thresholddef>
   In Note 3 "pair of opposing transitions involving a saturated red" 
has been tranlated as
   "paar tegengestelde overgangen, waaronder verzadigd rood", as if 
"verzadigd rood"/"saturated red" were in itself an opposing 
transition. This phrase should be tranlated as "paar tegengestelde 
waarin verzadigd rood voorkomt" or "paar tegengestelde overgangen van 
of naar verzadigd rood".


b. "idiom"
   <http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/#idiomsdef> /
   <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#idiomsdef>
   "without losing the meaning" has been translated as "zonder dat ze 
hun betekenis verliezen", as if the individual words would lose the 
meaning (they don't), while the intent is that the idiom as a whole 
would lose its meaning. This phrase should be translated as "zonder 
dat de uitdrukking haar betekenis verliest".


c. "large-scale (text)": note 3:
    <http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/#larger-scaledef> /
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#larger-scaledef>
     "the particular fonts in use" has been translated as "de 
speciale lettertypen die ze gebruiken", as if "particular" here meant 
"special" (as opposed to "ordinary"), instead of "specific". The note 
applies to all fonts, not just "special" ones, so the phrase should 
be translated as "de specifieke lettertypes die ze gebruiken".


c. "large-scale (text)": note 5:
    <http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/#larger-scaledef> /
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#larger-scaledef>
The syntax of 'De "equivalente" groottes voor andere lettertypen, 
zoals de CJK-talen, zouden de equivalente groottes de grootte van de 
minimale grote letters zijn die voor die talen gebruikt worden.' does 
not make sense.
Better alternative:
'De "equivalente" groottes voor andere lettertypes zoals de CJK-talen 
zouden de minimale grootte voor grote tekst en de daaropvolgende 
grotere standaardgrootte voor die talen zijn.'


d. "navigated sequentially"
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#nav-seqdef> /
    <http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/#nav-seqdef>
    "the order defined for advancing focus" has been translated as 
"de volgorde gedefinieerd voor vooruit verplaatsend focus", as if the 
focus actively advances itself (and resulting in unidiomatic Dutch). 
The phrase should be translated as "de volgorde gedefinieerd voor het 
voortbewegen van de focus" or (even better) "... voor het verplaatsen 
van de focus".


e. "set of Web pages"
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#set-of-web-pagesdef> /
    <http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/#set-of-web-pagesdef>
    "would be considered different sets of Web pages" has been 
translated as "zouden beschouwd worden als verschillende 
verzamelingen webpagina's", but "would" should not be translated as a 
conditional expression here - to avoid confusion.


f. "Web page"
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#webpagedef> /
    <http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/#webpagedef>
    The phrases "non-embedded resource", "other resources" and "Web 
resource" have been translated as "niet ingebedde hulpbron", "andere 
hulpbronnen" and "webhulpbron", respectively, i.e. as if resource had 
something to do with "help". But the intent is web content in 
general, not just help pages etc; "resource" should be treated as a 
posh word for "object" (but English-Dutch translating dictionaries 
are unaware of this usage). My alternative translations are: 
"niet-ingebed object",  "andere objecten",  "webobject", respectively.



In informative content:

g. "Important Terms in WCAG 2.0" : "Accessibility Supported"
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#new-terms> /
    <http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/#new-terms>
    "Technology features can be used in ways that are not 
accessibility supported (...) as long as they are not relied upon to 
conform to any success criterion (...)."
has been translated as
     "Technologie-eigenschappen kunnen benut worden met methodes die 
niet door toegankelijkheid ondersteund worden (...), zolang we er 
niet van op aan kunnen dat ze aan een succescriterium conformeren 
(...)." Which means: "Technology features can be used in ways that 
are not accessibility supported (...) as long as we can't assume that 
they to conform to any success criterion (...)." This translation 
basically transforms the intent into something that contradicts WCAG.
The translation should be "Technologie-eigenschappen kunnen benut 
worden op een manier die niet door toegankelijkheid ondersteund wordt 
(niet werkt ...), zolang er niet op gesteund wordt om aan een 
succescriterium conformeren (...)."

Best regards,

Christophe Strobbe


http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-translators/2010AprJun/0092.html
At 00:43 12/05/2010, Velleman, Eric wrote:
>Dear Coralie, W3C,
>
>We are pleased to announce that the majority of stakeholders have 
>indicated that they have in fact reviewed the Dutch translation of 
>the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 and that they consider 
>it to be an accurate translation. A short report of the work sofar 
>is included below. The list of all issues and the agreed and 
>accurate translation proposal (as input into the translation) is 
>attached to this mail. The overview has been sent to the list 
>earlier for the reviewers and stakeholders.
>
>The translation as now agreed to by the stakeholders can be fround at:
>http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/
>
>The errata is available at:
>http://www.w3c.nl/Vertalingen/WCAG20/errata/
>
>On behalf of the stakeholders, the LTO and the W3C Benelux Office 
>would like to advise W3C that from the standpoint of the majority of 
>the stakeholders involved in the authorized translation of WCAG2.0 
>to Dutch, the translation is accurate and a new review round is not necessary.
>
>We would like to plan a press release together with W3C for the 
>launch of the Dutch authorized translation.
>
>
>*****
>Short report of the translation work and status:
>(...)
>
>Besides comments from the reviewer group, very few comments where 
>received during the review period. After working on the comments 
>from the reviewers, we ensured that a majority of the reviewing 
>organizations sent an email to us and the translators' mailing list 
>confirming that they have in fact reviewed the document, and that 
>they consider it to be an accurate translation. Up to today, we 
>received this message from 17 of the stakeholder organisations 
>taking part in the translation.
>
>(...)
>
>Eric
>
>=========================
>Eric Velleman
>Accessibility Foundation
>University of Twente
>
>Oudenoord 325,
>3513EP Utrecht (The Netherlands);
>Tel: +31 (0)30 - 2398270
>www.accessibility.nl / www.wabcluster.org / www.econformance.eu / 
>www.game-accessibility.com
>
>Accessibility is Member of W3C
>=========================

-- 
Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD
Research Group on Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442
B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51
http://www.docarch.be/
---
"Better products and services through end-user empowerment" 
http://www.usem-net.eu/
---
Please don't invite me to LinkedIn, Facebook, Quechup or other 
"social networks". You may have agreed to their "privacy policy", but 
I haven't.

Received on Monday, 28 June 2010 17:05:27 UTC