- From: Abel Braaksma <abel.online@xs4all.nl>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:58:46 +0100
- To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- CC: w3c-translators@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4EE77636.5090107@xs4all.nl>
Hi Bert, I've forwarded your question to some of my Ukrainian (and also Russian speaking) friends. To summarize there findings: - The text is not an equal translation of the spec, and sometimes differs significantly and sometimes omits items (like "Selectors level 4 extends level 3 with new ways to select elements. based, e.g., on what they contain or on what follows." is not translated). I don't know when the translation is done, possibly it has just gotten outdated. - Individual words have been misunderstood (example "state of CSS as of 2006" was translated as "строение CSS в 2006", which means something like "consitution of CSS in 2006" or "structure of...". A better word would be "состояние" (current state) instead of "строение". This mistake (state vs structure/constitution) is consequent in the document). - Sometimes meaning shifts, because equivalent word in Russian/Ukrainian doesn't have equal meaning in context. Example "Many primarily visual devices" is translated as "Многие прежде визуальные устройства" means actually means "Many previously visual devices are...". - They found some inconsistencies in Russian word endings, but not too many, and several typos and missing plurals. - Sometimes, the words make sense individually, but not as a sentence (as if partially done by a machine translation. We checked, but Google Translate for instance, provided worse results), for instance, the sentence "которые являются стабильными и, показанные для работы." was not understood by them, looks like a word-by-word comparison. - In general, it appears that the Russian text is better than the Ukrainian one - Of course, there are the typical problems with certain terms, i.e., "hovering" was translated as "зависания", which means "to hang / hanging". A better word might be "навести" (ua) or "наведениe мыши". When I asked them whether the text was understandable as a whole, the answer was yes. But it could be better. It seems to have not been proofread by anybody native, contains mostly typos, grammatical and word-to-word translation errors, but it could be worse. I've received help of the individuals Andriy Kvasnytsa, Andriy Hapa, Vitaliy Yudenkov, Vitaliy Mykytenko. Regards, Abel Braaksma On 12-12-2011 16:39, Bert Bos wrote: > Hello (Russian and Ukrainian) translators, > > I'm looking for advice: > > I received a comment about two previously translated pages, one in > Russian and one in Ukrainian, saying that they are of low quality. Are > they indeed so bad that it is better to remove them? > > Russian: > http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/specs.ru.html > > Ukrainian: > http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/specs.uk.html > > > Thanks in advance for any help! > > Bert
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2011 15:59:23 UTC