Re: Restarting W3C Volunteer Translation Tracking

Hi Stefan,

> So overall the easy effort to announce a translation, maybe having it> started already or almost ready to publish, then to announce the>
availability brought out the majority of translations of good quality.
> 
> Having a quality management system is a good idea (I did some ISO 9001
> certification work), but we had that already before, not so obviously,
> but it worked, as bad translations got reported.

I'm very receptive to your point that too much QA creates too much
friction, which can be deadly to a volunteer-based effort.

But while *some* bad translations got reported, I think it's very
unclear whether all of them were, let alone how easy it is to spot some
of the abuse (e.g. where different content is provided if someone is
coming from the W3C site vs elsewhere).

> It doubt it will become better by making every step visible at Github
> and having a hundred "smart" people watch and "help" with the
> translation. Very often there won't be any helpers, sometimes you find
> just talkers who actually hold you back from doing work.

Good input, thanks - I think that's indeed one aspect by which the new
workflow will have to be evaluated; maybe the fact that the new proposed
workflow removes a lot of the incentive for cheating (by hosting
translation in W3C-controled space) makes the other QA processes
redundant and counter-productive.

> Jens Oliver Meierts comment on "show some appreciation" for the
> translators is right on. Nobody does this for a long time when you don't
> even get proper recognition. I remember being invited to some talks and
> some events, that helped a lot with the motivation because you could
> actually talk to people working on the specs or somewhere around it.

Again, thanks - that's very helpful feedback on the kind of recognition
program we should consider.

Dom

Received on Friday, 12 October 2018 09:16:56 UTC