- From: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:14:57 +0100
- To: w3c-translators@w3.org
> What was supposed to be a good idea ist turning into a fiasco of link > hungry webmasters posing as translators who are translating documents > no one really wants or needs. > > […] Just a few remarks: * Translations are a matter of accessibility, and we should basically welcome W3C translations in ANY language. * W3C quality assurance surely knows some “potential”; not only appears to exist no process for checking translations (not counting “authorized” localizations), there are even general issues related to already KNOWN errors and mistakes. * Translating original documents is “indirectly” mandatory, as far as I understand the W3C Translations home [1]. Personally, I find it at least UNPROFESSIONAL when translators really use other localizations as the foundation for their work – every translation means a “deviation” and thus a risk that meaning gets changed or even lost. This risk is unnecessary and, from my point of view, inacceptable. * We shouldn't forget the bright side, meaning that providing W3C translations gets more and more popular and that this is indeed a great thing. As a translator of quite a few W3C documents [2] since 2003, I remember different times … However, I guess we all agree that focus on the quality of our translations is most important, so let's see how we can improve it (even more), no matter if localizations are German, Afrikaans, or Maltese. Happy New Year, Jens. [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/ [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/11/Translations/Lists/OverviewTrans.html#Jens_Meiert -- Jens Meiert http://meiert.com/en/
Received on Sunday, 30 December 2007 17:15:11 UTC