On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Minata Hatsune <minatahatsune(a)gmail.com> wrote: Hi Minata, The board had as one of it's goals this year to have as much translated as possible for the board and FDC Elections (especially the board elections) because of that they asked me to pay for some professional translations for some targeted languages (mostly popular languages in different areas of the world, my boss Philippe picked them earlier for the strategy consultation a couple months ago) and Vietnamese was one of them. To be honest I've found community members make the best translations (especially given that some words are Wikimedia specific) but given the large amount of text and the short time schedule the elections have we wanted to ensure we'd get some translations in on time and allow community members to do the quick fixes that make it more understandable and that much better. Both Alex (Azariv) and Varnent were plugging those paid translations in. James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

I see, I am impressed by the WMF's efforts for translaton work of this election. However, I think there should be a public announcement for translators who signed in Special:TranslatorSignUp, or maybe it has been mentioned in a public site but I have missed. :) Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy (< https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Trần_Nguyễn_Minh_Huy>) Supporter, Vietnames Wikimedia Projects 2015-05-02 21:37 GMT+07:00 James Alexander &lt;jalexander(a)wikimedia.org&gt;rg>:

On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy &lt;minhhuywiki(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Good point, but it's currently not possible technically to send such a translation notifications for banner translations (only for page translations): https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T58187 -- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB

2015-05-03 22:50 GMT+02:00 Whatamidoing (WMF)/Sherry Snyder < ssnyder(a)wikimedia.org&gt;gt;: Yes there are four links, but all of them are explicit about their topic. I personnaly agree with W3C (also because "click here" is non sense when you don't use a mouse: you could "tap" it (on a tactile screen), or select it with the keyboard (TAB keys) and press Enter, or use a vocal interface for reading the text, order to the browser to enumerate vocally selectable links and activating links by pronouncing a word like "go" or "select"... Personnally, the W3C could have emphasized the main link, but the leading sentence is enough "Tell me more about" (the rest after the colon is a summary description of what it is, because "Amaya" is not explicit enough to know what it means) It seems natural to add a few more links in this example because these are topics covered by Amaya, and main topics for the W3C itself (Amaya is not a required tool for working with HTML, SVG or MatchML). May be the W3C could have put the whole sentence "Tell me more about Amaya" in the link, or could have boldened the Amaya term, to show more explicitly that this is the main term. But in this example, all 4 links are appropriate in the context of the page where this is used: a general page about web design in general where Amaya is not essential, but references to HTML and SVG are essential (MathML is less essential, in fact given that HTML5 now includes SVG and MathML (and a few other related standards, including XML data not listed here), it could have just used a single link to HTML; SVG and MathML are no longer needed here) So yes, I ALWAYS avoid the "click here" (or remove it when I find them: sometimes the links are only on the very short word "here" and are almost invisible, notably on sites like our wikis that do not force underlined links because underlining does not work very well with international scripts): We use explicit terms about the main topic of the target page, and if it is not enough explicit, we add a summary description, like the W3C did in this example (even if it could be shortened today). The W3C also gives here a general opinion (and excellent advice) shared by lot of informed web designers, and it is appropriate here when W3C supports the development of accessibility on the web: don't assume a mouse or any hardware device. And we should not even need to depend on visual tips (that appear temporarily when hovering links with a mouse): the topic must be clearly stated without having to discover that there's a small tooltip (frequently not very accessible). Another final reason is that the document may also be printed: will you know what the links refers to when its printed description is just "click here"? No, even if the list of links is also printed at end of pages: the URLs will be printed, but their description will just be a mere "click here" completely out of context, making the URL shown in that list completely blind without any description.

2015-05-03 22:50 GMT+02:00 Whatamidoing (WMF)/Sherry Snyder < ssnyder(a)wikimedia.org&gt;gt;: It has not diverged sensibly: did you read the original post, which also gives very clear reasons that are still valid today (accessibility, content indexing for search engines...). It is now even better than this old post, not "worse".

Done for ne_NP ! 2015-05-04 9:03 GMT+05:45 Whatamidoing (WMF)/Sherry Snyder < ssnyder(a)wikimedia.org&gt;gt;: