I see what you mean and think that this is often the reason for "not so
good" translations. For instance, it's happened to me many time to
prefer English version of documentation over Italian one because the
latter was trying to provide Italian translation for technical terms.
This said, however, I believe that any language is a special case here,
for instance French has accepted technical computer related words that
simply does not exist in Italian (the English version is adopted into
the language). So, if it was me, I'd provide bundles for everything in
the gui and expect translators to decide what to do for each of them.
Cheers
Alessio
On 01/10/2012 10:34 AM, Heiko Braun wrote:
I am currently going through the console, preparing it for i18n.
Basically making sure everything is properly placed into bundles that can be translated.
There is one thing I need your feedback on:
How are we going to treat strings that reflect technical terms?
I.e. a log handler has an editable field name (speaking of the UI here) called "Auto
Flush".
To me this represent a technical term that corresponds with other places like the XML
schema, the CLI and the actual XML configuration files. As such, I objecting to translate
those. "Log Level" is another good example.
Now, to many native english speaking people, this might not be obvious, but once you
start translating those things get pretty awkward. IMO technical terms should stay
untouched and I expect people to incorporate those easily into their own language. As a
result the web management interface would keep english terms for elements that derive from
the XML schema or other API and provide localized description and help texts for anything
else.
What are you thoughts on this?
--
Heiko Braun
Senior Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
http://about.me/hbraun
_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
--
Alessio Soldano
Web Service Lead, JBoss