[Translators-l] Translation of a glossary

Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki at gmail.com
Mon Dec 26 18:42:19 UTC 2011

Niklas Laxström, 26/12/2011 16:36:
> I think that glossary/terminology is certainly needed, but it must
> also be machine readable and multilingual. It should also be
> prescriptive where possible to unify also the English usage of terms.
> There is no way it will grow into useful level if it is too hard for
> all languages to contribute to it. One aspect of this is that the
> terms should have definition and/or explanation - how else can you
> even start thinking translations for it.

I agree, although it's not so obvious how to organize them in a simple 
and yet effective way.
Seb, if you didn't yet, I encourage you to read the discussion that I've 
now moved to https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Talk:Terminology and comment 
(it's stalled).
As you said, it's important to find words to be included: as Niklas 
suggests, this should probably be the first and only thing to do 
(together with definitions): before translation of the terminology/glossary.
I think that wiki terminology should be kept on/moved to Translatewiki 
and Wikimedia terminology stay on Meta, but the important thing is that 
we avoid duplicate work and we find a common approach to join efforts.

With regard to words to be included (but perhaps I should say it on 
wiki), beside WMF job titles currently included I think it's better to 
add only some general terms which are commonly used to form titles and 
are difficult to translate (aka drive translators crazy); I put some for 
the Italian translation of [[wmf:Staff]] on 
https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Talk:Terminology .


More information about the Translators-l mailing list