[fab] fedora in brazil

[Patrick W. Barnes]

On Friday 21 April 2006 10:28, Karsten Wade <kwade at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 19:47 -0500, Patrick W. Barnes wrote:
> > the translation.  That would leave only the English form as a canonical
> > resource, which avoids any liability issues from translation errors, and
> > it would allow translators to help the information proliferate through
> > the community.
>
> I agree in principal, but this brings up a very interesting point.
>
> Why is English our only trusted language?
>
> By that I mean ... if we put the same safeguards in place for $LANG that
> we put in for English, can we pass trust to trusted people who work
> within that $LANG?
>
> For example, in Fedora Documentation, I have been encouraging works
> submitted in original languages other than English.  Such a work must
> come with a trusted editor who speaks/reads the language well enough to
> confirm translation, so, either a native speaker or a language genius.
> That's the exact same thing we require in English; no content can
> progress very far or be draft published without an editor.
>
> By trust, I mean, formal recognition that this person knows wtf Fedora
> is about and can be trusted to speak for the whole and correct wrongs
> where they find them.
>
> Trust goes like this:  Board -> PMC -> individuals in the project.
>
> So, since we already display this passage of trust in the case of
> Ambassadors, we should be able to use the same for translations.
>
> One reason we need to follow this method is, we already display this
> trust in Fedora Translation.  We trust them to translate the strings
> faithfully.  This is why I don't have to go to Red Hat translators and
> ask them to verify every line of a translation.
>
> Does it make sense to establish this level of trust into announcements,
> etc.?
>

I would say that my statement applies equally to materials that originate 
within the project in another language.  The basic idea is that each document 
should have only one form in one language that is considered the canonical 
resource.  We start to have problems if we consider more than one resource 
canonical, since they might contain slight differences that are inherent in 
translation and could lead to conflicts.  A perfectly accurate translation 
can be picked apart to create discrepancies, simply due to differences in 
language constructs.  In my previous message, I address the English form as 
the canonical form only because it is the language that most of our materials 
originate in, but materials created in another language could just as easily 
have their canonical version in that language.

-- 
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64 at n-man.com

http://www.n-man.com/

Have I been helpful?  Rate my assistance!
http://rate.affero.net/nman64/
-- 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20060421/3e74430f/attachment.sig>