XSF Discussion - 2021-10-29

  1. Zash

    Is there a registry of registries? 🙂

  2. emus

    dwd, MattJ, ralphm, jonas’: Yes, the translations should be processed by volunteers and only shown if available. My intention was just to ask first if you like the idea and if there are legal things. for example if there is a limitation to languages we can actually review with on of our members. The efforts to tranlsate need to be done by volunteers not as an enforced thing of course

  3. emus

    I take away you agreed to it to offer it on a voluntary basis?

  4. ralphm

    I'd say translations are best effort, as a service, and specifically only for non-normative texts. So all the standards-related and organizational / legal documents are excluded.

  5. MattJ

    emus: not quite, at least not for the whole site. The problem is that translations don't just need to be done, they need to be maintained.

  6. ralphm

    And would certainly not make translations a requirement or objective. The XSF is strapped for volunteer work and I'm sure there's lots to do if we'd only stick to the English language.

  7. Zash

    Finding translations where the source page has newer changes is not impossible, at least.

  8. ralphm

    News items / blog posts generally don't change after being published, so having the translations, that people are already making, next to them seems nice.

  9. Zash

    Do other pages change all that often either?

  10. emus

    but could we have general sites on xmpp (e.g. myths) and also the client/server sites tranlsated?

  11. emus

    I agree that legal sites etc are not easy

  12. Zash

    Maybe not worry too much about it, but try to keep in mind to check if future changes might outdate a translation and figure out how to deal with it then?

  13. Kev

    I suspect as long as we linked to translations as "List of unofficial translations for this page" or something, it would be ok.

  14. dwd

    I don't think we need to worry over the official versus unofficial status of the vast majority of stuff. It's not like the newsletter get vetting at Board level prior to publication or anything.

  15. Kev

    No, indeed. I was just thinking that "Unofficial translation made on timestamp X" would mean we didn't have to care so much about diligence in updating, even for website pages.

  16. emus

    I imagine as following: - have a statement that indicated that this is not a official translation - have a timestamp. if it does not align with the original english one it will not be shown

  17. dwd

    "Translations are submitted by volunteers, and may at times not reflect the English original", then?

  18. dwd

    "Les traductions sont soumises par des bénévoles et peuvent parfois ne pas refléter l’original anglais", alors?

  19. dwd

    Not convinced that "refléter" is idiomatic there, mind.

  20. mathieui

    "peuvent parfois ne pas être fidèles au sens original" imo

  21. dwd

    Yes, I think that's much better.

  22. dwd

    "May not be faithful to the original meaning", if I follow correctly? (I'm better at translating back from French than to it).

  23. ralphm

    For some reason I crave spareribs now

  24. emus

    If we do it this way it must be stated in English and the respective language I think

  25. wurstsalat

    I fear this would end up with a pile of outdated / incomplete translations for xmpp.org. I'm in favor of translating newsletter/blog posts. But I wouldn't want to maintain translations for pages with changing content.

  26. ralphm


  27. wurstsalat

    page is ready for translations now. naming convention would be example_post.md, example_post.de.md, example_post.fr.md etc. to link translated pages to the original post

  28. wurstsalat

    if there’s a native spanish (and/or) romanian speaking person here in this room: it would be nice if we could have this one translated to both languages :) "Translations are submitted by volunteers, and may at times not reflect the English original"