discuss: Decline in Translations (was Re: French question)
Subject:
Decline in Translations (was Re: French question)
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
2 Jan 2006 04:48:29 -0000
Message-Id: <20060102044819.GA2234@lafn.org>
On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 01:01:52PM +0800, Alex Nordstrom wrote:
> Wednesday, 30 November 2005 23:02, Stein Gjoen wrote:
> > There is a link called "Translated HOWTOs" at
> > http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO/translations/
> > Looking through that directory, however (there is always an however),
> > much of it is old, all the way back to 1999. What happened to these
> > translation efforts. I cannot find the oldest (Swedish) one on the
> > net.
Many of them are older than 1999. Some were translated in 1999 but
originally written in earlier years.
>
> I'm personally working on reviving the Swedish translation project,
> which you can find here:
> ftp://ftp.se.linux.org/pub/Linux/swe-doc/official
>
> As for what happened, I can only theorise, but individual factors like
> changing priorities or obligations play a part, as do motivators, such
> as the population's perceived understanding of English and the
> perceived need for formal documentation as software becomes easier to
> use.
I think there are a number of reasons for the substantial decline in
the translation effort. One was that no one at LDP examined what
kinds of documentation were needed but missing from the collection.
Even if someone had done this, it doesn't mean that an author could be
found to write such documentation. Another reason is that a number of
important docs weren't updated. So the above implies that there are
just not very many up-to-date and important docs that are worthwhile
to translate. Finding which ones are worthwhile to translate is
another problem.
Also, you imply less "perceived" need for documentation as the
"software becomes easier to use". It's not only "perceived" but
real. The latest Linux kernel is a lot better at finding hardware than
older kernels, and it's partly due to the fact that over the years,
hardware has become easier to find, due to the PCI bus, etc. Thus
there's less need for docs on hardware. Except that there is a need
for docs explaining how to use hardware not well supported by Linux
due to proprietary interfaces, etc. But many people just avoid such
hardware so documentation on it has a limited readership and may not
be worthwhile to translate.
> Also, sociological factors such as the leadership, momentum,
> workflow, and organisational culture of the translation effort are
> important to the vitality thereof.
I think the above is not a major factor. Rather there is less need
for translations and I suppose some dismay when it was observed that
translations are more apt to be out-of-date due to the time lag
between writing something and completing a translation of it. This is
especially true since the translations are being done by volunteers
that often don't have too much time to devote to it and thus
translation is not done very fast. And then there's the problem of
updating translations when the doc is updated. By then, the original
translator may not be available. Minor changes in wording can cause a
lot of work for translators.
Another factor is documentation supplied by the various distributions
and also by Gnome and KDE. Also, Linux on the desktop hasn't grown
very fast in countries (such as China, Russia, etc.) where most people
get Windows for free. Then there's the competition with printed
non-free (mostly) Linux documentation.
So improving the quality and scope of LDP's documentation would help
revive the translation effort.
David Lawyer
