Re: Spanish Translation of DIWG Glossary

Hello Ivan,
Fine. Thank you! Also thanks for your clarification.

All the best!
Marta

Marta Isabel Trejo
marta@sidar.org
www.sidar.org
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>
To: "Marta Isabel Trejo" <marta@alfanex.net>
Cc: "Rhys Lewis" <rhys.lewis@volantis.com>; <www-di@w3.org>; 
<w3c-translators@w3.org>; "Stephane Boyera" <boyera@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 5:44 AM
Subject: Re: Spanish Translation of DIWG Glossary



Marta Isabel Trejo wrote:
> Hello Ivan,
>
> Thank you! for your comments and proposals. Thanks.
>
> I should have kept my mouth shut about the updated version... ja, ja, ja
> (laugh sound in Spanish).
>
> 1. A hint: There is a French version of the DIWG Glossary. Please see
> http://www.w3.org/2003/03/Translations/byTechnology?technology=di-gloss,
> including a pointer to
> http://www.yoyodesign.org/doc/w3c/di-gloss-20030825/
>

Oops, you caught me off guard on this one:-( It seems that I did not pay 
enough attention
at the time! (I will also add this to the home page...)


> 2. I don't quite understand what you mean by "an equilibrium state". My
> apologies in advance.  Firstly, Rhys' explanations are crystal clear. 
> There
> is
> a glossary version dated 2003 and the updated version is dated 2005.
> Secondly,
> Rhys said: "We have a well defined process for making sure that any 
> updated
> definitions remain, so that older documents are still valid, and that
> revisions are linked within the glossary so that people can see how
> definitions have changed."  In fact, I find the defined process is great!
> and works fine. Thirdly, technologies evolve rapidly, and new concepts
> continuously emerge. So literature evolves more or less at the same rate.
> This is my understanding. Again, my apologies in advance if, in fact, I
> misunderstood you.
>

At some point in time, that document will get to some final stage, if no 
later than when
the group ceases to exist;-) But I see your point.

> 3. Your proposal about a date-less URI is fine. As soon as the SIDAR team
> makes the appropriate changes, I'll let you know. (smile).
>

O.k. Here is what I will do. I will add the current translation everywhere, 
because
precedence rule is valid here and the French translation is already there; 
but I will
update the entry with the date-less URI when available.

The important thing is to get this to the community.

Thanks

Ivan

> Thank you for your support!
> Best Wishes!
> Marta
>
> Marta Trejo
> marta@sidar.org
> www.sidar.org
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>
> To: "Marta Isabel Trejo" <marta@alfanex.net>
> Cc: "Rhys Lewis" <rhys.lewis@volantis.com>; <www-di@w3.org>;
> <w3c-translators@w3.org>; "Stephane Boyera" <boyera@w3.org>
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 5:54 AM
> Subject: Re: Spanish Translation of DIWG Glossary
>
> Marta,
>
> Well, you see, you just showed the problem: you have a translation now for
> the 2003 version of the glossary, but you update it to the 2005 version
> (which, I
> guess, will supersede the previous one): should I keep a record for all
> those? It is not
> really optimal, this is not really the goal for the translation pages that
> are
> meant for stable documents...
>
> Here is what I would propose:
>
> - please, establish a date-less URI for your translation (the same way
> as as
> the W3C
> document has a date-less URI, always pointing at the latest version). At
> present, this
> would point at your translation of 2003; when finished, you can switch
> it to
> the 2005 version.
>
> - I would put that date-less URI to the front page of the Translations 
> page
> as a glossary
> in evolution but which is nevertheless an excellent resource for Spanish
> translators already
>
> - When the DI glossary gets to an equilibrium state (whether Rhys & co
> decide to turn it
> into a stable Note or a Recommendation, this is their choice), then your
> most up-to-date
> translation would be added to the rest of the translation list as all the
> others (while
> keeping the pointer on the front page, too).
>
> How does this sound to you? If it is o.k. then I will do it as soon as I
> get
> a date-less
> URI from you.
>
> Sincerely
>
> Ivan
>
> Marta Isabel Trejo wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Thank you, Ivan, for your e-mails. Also thanks for your thoughts.
>>
>> Ivan wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> Great. The question then is (to you and Marta): should I link it as a
>>> regular document
>>> like all the others, or put it on the front page as one of the Spanish
>>> glossaries?
>>
>>
>>
>> What about including both? That is, a link as a regular document and a
>> link as one of the Spanish glossaries... As I understand it,
>> translations are meant to help disseminate W3C efforts and activities
>> among non-English speakers, so... Just an idea (smile)
>>
>> One thing: The Spanish translation for the updated version of the DIWG
>> Glossary (http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-di-gloss-20050118/) is under way
>> (I will announce this in a separate email). At SIDAR, we intend to keep
>> both Spanish translations of the DIWG Glossary online. These
>> translations will be duly identified. Hope this will be OK for you.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Marta
>>
>> Marta Trejo
>> marta@sidar.org
>> www.sidar.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>
>> To: "Rhys Lewis" <rhys.lewis@volantis.com>
>> Cc: "Marta Isabel Trejo" <marta@alfanex.net>; <www-di@w3.org>;
>> <w3c-translators@w3.org>; "Stephane Boyera" <boyera@w3.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 9:10 AM
>> Subject: Re: Spanish Translation of DIWG Glossary
>>
>> Rhys Lewis wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Ivan, thanks for your mail.
>>>
>>> The DI Glossary is an odd working draft. It is not a usual rec-track
>>> document. We need to
>>> evolve it as we write our other rec-track documents, but it is not in
>>> a state of flux. Indeed
>>
>>
>>  > its last revision was stable for over a year.
>>
>>>
>>> We decided to keep it as a working draft so that we could update it in
>>> line with new rec-track
>>
>>
>>  > documents appearing. We need our public working drafts to be able to
>> refer to a public
>> glossary.
>>
>>> As we write new documents we may need to add new definitions to the
>>> glossary. We have a well defined
>>> process for making sure that any updated definitions remain, so that
>>> older documents are still valid,
>>> and that revisions are linked within the glossary so that people can
>>> see how definitions have changed.
>>>
>>> By the way, if you can suggest a better W3C document type more
>>> appropriate for a glossary, we'd be
>>> happy to consider using it.
>>>
>>
>> I am not sure either... W3C Working Group Note maybe?
>>
>>> So my main point is that this is not a regular working draft. It is
>>> not changing rapidly, and new r
>>> evisions only appear in order to support publication of new rec-track
>>> documents. Personally, I'd be
>>> comfortable to see it linked from the translations page.
>>>
>>
>> Great. The question then is (to you and Marta): should I link it as a
>> regular document
>> like all the others, or put it on the front page as one of the Spanish
>> glossaries?
>>
>> Ivan
>>
>>> Best wishes
>>>
>>> Rhys
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org]
>>> Sent: 23 February 2005 09:59
>>> To: Marta Isabel Trejo; Rhys Lewis
>>> Cc: www-di@w3.org; w3c-translators@w3.org; Stephane Boyera
>>> Subject: Re: Spanish Translation of DIWG Glossary
>>>
>>>
>>> Marta and Rhys,
>>>
>>> as the maintainer of the Translations pages[1] of W3C...
>>>
>>> It is against our usual policy to put the translations of Working
>>> drafts in the database
>>> that generate that page[1], so I would be uneasy to add this one, too.
>>> (Working drafts
>>> have a short life span, after all...). I am also not sure that putting
>>> a glossary there
>>> would be the right approach.
>>>
>>> If you look at [2], we list some of the glossaries that our close
>>> 'friends' (translators,
>>> W3C Offices) prepare and maintain. It strikes me that would be a much
>>> more appropriate
>>> place to put the link to, and would be more visible and useful for the
>>> community (in this
>>> case the community of Spanish Translators). Would you agree with that?
>>> If so, my question
>>> is to Marta: do yo think I should add this reference now (I am happy
>>> to do it) or do you
>>> prefer to wait until the original evolves to its final version and you
>>> update your
>>> translation?
>>>
>>> Thanks you
>>>
>>> Ivan
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/
>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/#res
>>>
>>> Marta Isabel Trejo wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> This is to advise that the Spanish translation of the DIWG Glossary
>>>> dated 25 August 2003 is available at:
>>>> http://www.sidar.org/recur/desdi/traduc/es/borrador/WD-di-gloss-20030825/index.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The original English version is available at:
>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-di-gloss-20030825/
>>>>
>>>> Your feedback will be greatly appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Marta
>>>>
>>>> Marta Trejo
>>>> marta@sidar.org
>>>> www.sidar.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-- 

Ivan Herman
W3C Communications Team, Head of Offices
C/o W3C Benelux Office at CWI, Kruislaan 413
1098SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
tel: +31-20-5924163; mobile: +31-641044153;
URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/

Received on Monday, 28 February 2005 13:28:01 UTC