On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 1:54 AM, Erik Moeller <erik(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
2008/8/2 Anders Wegge Jakobsen
<wegge(a)wegge.dk>dk>:
I will continue pointing out those hilarious
examples of
worse-than-none translations that ensues from the naive thought that
anyone will ever proofread a translation, when it has first been
marked as translated.
Perhaps it would be possible to add basic validation functionality
(not necessarily something as sophisticated as FlaggedRevs) to
TranslateWiki?
If it is, it is more than great I think. See also the thread about
http://jp.librarything.com
where they provide the registered users the way to evaluate the
current version, not only the opportunity to submit the alternative.
If the entire site has a feature to recommend an alternative to system
messages (since it is read-only for most visitors anyway), like Google
Translator gives its visitors, I think it better from the point of
proofreading, but not sure it is balanced with the other aspect &
workload.
Then the quality of a translation could be ranked by
the number of people who have looked at and validated it.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
_______________________________________________
Translators-l mailing list
Translators-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/translators-l
--
KIZU Naoko
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese)
Quote of the Day (English):
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD