Re: German Translation WCAG 2.1 - Disapproval from Eric Eggert on 2022-04-29 (public-auth-trans-de@w3.org from April 2022)

From: Eric Eggert <mail@yatil.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 15:34:37 +0200
To: zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com
Cc: public-auth-trans-de@w3.org
Message-ID: <8997920C-DE73-4F5B-AB2E-5E818065C237@yatil.net>
Thanks, the opposition is acknowledged.

On 29 Apr 2022, at 15:25, zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com wrote:

> Hi Eric,
>
>
>
> your suggestion on Issue 2.1.2 No keyboard trap #64 < 
> <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/64> 
> https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/64> looks okay to 
> me.  But I would prefer “Umschalttaste” rather than 
> “Hilfstaste”.  I think that is be better understandable for a 
> broader audience.
>
>
>
> However, I sustain my opposition to Issue [Translation of "assistive 
> technology" #63]( 
> <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/63> 
> https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/63).
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Gottfried
>
>
>
> Von: Eric Eggert <mail@yatil.net>
> Gesendet: Freitag, 22. April 2022 18:44
> An: zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com
> Cc: public-auth-trans-de@w3.org
> Betreff: Re: German Translation WCAG 2.1 - Disapproval
>
>
>
> Hi Gottfried,
>
> Issue 2.1.2 No keyboard trap #64 < 
> <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/64> 
> https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/64> :
>
> * It is not true that the English text is as unclear as the German 
> translation. The English term “unmodified arrow or tab keys“ can 
> be generally understood on the background of the common term 
> „modifier keys” (e.g. see Wikipedia entry on “Modifier key” < 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modifier_key> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modifier_key> ). But the German word 
> “nicht modifizierte Taste” does not have such a common 
> understanding and it is completely unclear what it means to a lay 
> person that is not deep into WCAG.
>
> I looked into this again today (after being under the weather for a 
> few weeks), and I think I came up with an agreeable solution you can 
> find in the  
> <https://outline-rocks.github.io/wcag/guidelines/#keine-tastaturfalle> 
> working draft.
>
> Apparently the German translation for “Modifier Key” is 
> “Hilfstaste” according to Wikipedia.  
> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tastenkombination#Hilfstasten_f%C3%BCr_Tastenkombinationen> 
> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tastenkombination#Hilfstasten_für_Tastenkombinationen
>
> With that, I changed the sentence in the following way:
>
> Previous version:
>
> Wenn der Tastaturfokus durch eine <a>Tastaturschnittstelle</a>
> auf einen Bestandteil der Seite bewegt werden kann, dann kann
> der Fokus von diesem Bestandteil weg bewegt werden, indem man
> nur die Tastaturschnittstelle benutzt; wenn man dazu mehr als nicht
> modifizierte Pfeil- oder Tabulatortasten oder andere übliche
> Ausstiegsmethoden benutzen muss, dann wird der Benutzer über
> die Methode zum Bewegen des Fokus informiert.
>
> Now:
>
> Wenn der Tastaturfokus durch eine <a>Tastaturschnittstelle</a>
> auf einen Bestandteil der Seite bewegt werden kann, dann kann
> der Fokus von diesem Bestandteil weg bewegt werden, indem man
> nur die Tastaturschnittstelle benutzt; wenn man dazu mehr als nicht
> durch Hilfstasten (wie z.B. Umschalt-, Steuerungs- oder Befehlstaste)
> modifizierte Pfeil- oder Tabulatortasten oder andere übliche
> Ausstiegsmethoden benutzen muss, dann wird der Benutzer über
> die Methode zum Bewegen des Fokus informiert.
>
> Basically, I added “durch Hilfstasten (wie z.B. Umschalt-, 
> Steuerungs- oder Befehlstaste)” and I think this is a modification 
> that is consistent with the original 2.0 translation.
>
> Regarding Issue [Translation of "assistive technology" #63]( 
> <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/63> 
> https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/63):
>
> * You have not provided convincing rationale for using the German word 
> “Technik” rather than “Technologien”.
>
> I tried to find the original discussion around this and I have no 
> rationale personally for it. As was pointed out in the discussion 
> above, “Technik” and “Technologie” can be used as synonyms.
>
> What I have done to maybe help with this issue without having to 
> rewrite a lot of the existing 2.0 documentation is adding a 
> translators note to the working draft. (Happy for suggestions for 
> better wording, if dealing with this issue in a note like this is 
> agreeable at all.)
>
> „Assistierenden Techniken“ in WCAG 2 werden mittlerweile meist als 
> „Assistive Technologien“ bezeichnet.
>
> I hope that helps with addressing the issues.
>
> 👋 Eric
>
> On 24 Mar 2022, at 17:31,  
> <mailto:zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com> 
> zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com wrote:
>
> Thank you, Eric, for your response.  However, I maintain my position 
> on the issues for the following reasons:
>
>
>
> Regarding Issue Translation of  
> <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/63> "assistive 
> technology" #63:
>
> * You have not provided convincing rationale for using the German word 
> “Technik” rather than “Technologien”.
>
> Issue 2.1.2 No keyboard trap #64 
> <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/64> :
>
> * It is not true that the English text is as unclear as the German 
> translation.  The English term “unmodified arrow or tab keys“ can 
> be generally understood on the background of the common term 
> „modifier keys” (e.g. see Wikipedia entry on “Modifier key” 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modifier_key> ). But the German word 
> “nicht modifizierte Taste” does not have such a common 
> understanding and it is completely unclear what it means to a lay 
> person that is not deep into WCAG.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Gottfried
>
>
>
> Von: Eric Eggert <mail@yatil.net <mailto:mail@yatil.net> >
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 23. März 2022 09:49
> An: zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com 
> <mailto:zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com>
> Cc: public-auth-trans-de@w3.org <mailto:public-auth-trans-de@w3.org>
> Betreff: Re: German Translation WCAG 2.1 - Disapproval
>
>
>
> Hi Gottfried,
>
> Here’s the rational from the translator’s views for these 
> non-implemented issues:
>
> The AGWG have, as originators of WCAG, made clear that consistency 
> over WCAG versions is important. This means for them that even wording 
> changes between different versions are impossible, with some very 
> minor exceptions (mostly editorial errata).
>
> * Issue Translation of
> < <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/63> 
> https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/63> "assistive
> technology" #63
>
> * This goes back to a translation error of WCAG 2.0. I do not accept
> that we must carry over a wrong translation of "assistive technology" 
> into
> WCAG 2.1. The self-imposed restriction that the translation of 
> existing
> passages from WCAG 2.0 must not change is unnecessary and not helpful 
> for
> the subject matter.
>
> As translators and practitioners, we see a challenge for documentation 
> that currently refers to WCAG 2.0 wording in this context. Every piece 
> of advice would need to be updated to reflect the new wording, or it 
> would need to include both wordings.
>
> The translation of assistive technology as “assistierende 
> Techniken” was a WCAG 2.0 translation consensus reached as German 
> speaking countries have different names. The discussion only refers to 
> sources in Germany for the impetus of the change request where 
> “assistive Technologien” is prevalent.
>
> However, when looking in other German speaking countries, like Austria 
> and Switzerland, “assistierende Technologien” is very common:  
> <https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22assistierende+technologien%22> 
> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22assistierende+technologien%22
>
> In addition, as mentioned in the above linked thread, the term is 
> broader in WCAG and does not only focus on “Hilfsmittel” but also 
> user agent functionality that can be used to make the web accessible.
>
> In aggregate, and as no other party, especially from the affected 
> communities outside of Germany, raised or supported the issue, the 
> translators decided to keep the consensus from the WCAG 2.0 
> translation and hence the status quo.
>
> * Issue 2.1.2 No keyboard trap #64
> < <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/64> 
> https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/64>
>
> * My proposal has not been accommodated, and there is no discussion or
> reason provided for that. Again, this is a translation error of WCAG 
> 2.0
> which should be corrected.
>
> The proposal has not been accommodated because it is a word-for-word 
> translation from the English source which is also ambiguous in that 
> regard.
>
> The proposed solution for the issue was to add a note to the WCAG 
> success criterion that would only exist in the translation.
>
> The translators are cautious to add interpretation to the translation, 
> and what “unmodified” means is not explained in WCAG or the 
> Understanding documents. We would encourage the AG Working Group to 
> clarify the use of “unmodified” keys in the Understanding document 
> for the SC 2.1.2.
>
> The proposed note names Control, Shift, Alt, and AltGr (the latter not 
> existing on most international and many non-Windows keyboards, which 
> probably would not make it accessibility supported) as examples for 
> “modifier keys”, but from the source material (WCAG), this is 
> unfortunately not clear.
>
> In light of all this, the translators decided to carry over the 
> uncertainty from the source document.
>
> (My apologies for not answering in the GitHub discussion earlier, I 
> was under the impression I had answered, but this must have slipped 
> through.)
>
> 👋 Eric
>
> On 23 Mar 2022, at 8:52, zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com 
> <mailto:zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com>  wrote:
>
> Dear W3C,
>
>
>
> this is a note regarding the proposed German translation of WCAG 2.1 
> at 
> https://outline-rocks.github.io/wcag/translations/CAT-WCAG21-DE-20211004/. 
>  I hereby disapprove this translation due to two issues that I have 
> raised and that were not sufficiently accommodated.
>
>
>
> The two issues were discussed in German and are documented on 
> https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions:
>
> * Issue Translation of  
> <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/63> "assistive 
> technology" #63
>
> * This goes back to a translation error of WCAG 2.0.  I do not accept 
> that we must carry over a wrong translation of “assistive 
> technology” into WCAG 2.1. The self-imposed restriction that the 
> translation of existing passages from WCAG 2.0 must not change is 
> unnecessary and not helpful for the subject matter.
>
> * Issue 2.1.2 No keyboard trap #64 
> <https://github.com/outline-rocks/wcag/discussions/64>
>
> * My proposal has not been accommodated, and there is no discussion or 
> reason provided for that. Again, this is a translation error of WCAG 
> 2.0 which should be corrected.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Gottfried Zimmermann
>
> Invited expert of W3C APA wg
>
>
>
> --
>
> outline Consulting
>
> Sandra Kallmeyer und Eric Eggert GbR
> Gutenbergstr. 12
> 57537 Wissen
> GERMANY
>
> USt-IdNr.: DE275406670
>
> info@outline.rocks <mailto:info@outline.rocks>
> www.outline.rocks <http://www.outline.rocks>
>
> Spielregeln
>  <http://outline.rocks/spielregeln.php> 
> http://outline.rocks/spielregeln.php
>
> --
>
> outline Consulting
>
> Sandra Kallmeyer und Eric Eggert GbR
> Gutenbergstr. 12
> 57537 Wissen
> GERMANY
>
> USt-IdNr.: DE275406670
>
>  <mailto:info@outline.rocks> info@outline.rocks
>  <http://www.outline.rocks> www.outline.rocks
>
> Spielregeln
>  <http://outline.rocks/spielregeln.php> 
> http://outline.rocks/spielregeln.php



--

outline Consulting

Sandra Kallmeyer und Eric Eggert GbR
Gutenbergstr. 12
57537 Wissen
GERMANY

USt-IdNr.: DE275406670

info@outline.rocks
www.outline.rocks

Spielregeln
http://outline.rocks/spielregeln.php
Received on Friday, 29 April 2022 13:34:55 UTC