From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean-Christophe Helary Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Translating Emacs manuals is of strategic importance Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2024 15:20:49 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87r0iz3lx0.fsf@yahoo.com> <877ckqa6m5.fsf@yahoo.com> <8734vda9kz.fsf@yahoo.com> <5EC9A02F-DB34-48B6-BD2D-CB9E89A385D0@traductaire-libre.org> <83r0iwuek9.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="22283"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Stefan Kangas , =?utf-8?Q?Vincent_Bela=C3=AFche?= , emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 05 16:36:42 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rLmFV-0005ar-QU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 05 Jan 2024 16:36:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rLmEq-0001P0-UZ; Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:36:00 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rLm0L-000743-Mu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:21:01 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-4317.proton.ch ([185.70.43.17]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rLm0J-0003LM-0a; Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:21:01 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=traductaire-libre.org; s=protonmail; t=1704468054; x=1704727254; bh=K5F2+VV2SqCRxvXDRHdvjfG7wngIqVpaH0DfGSVK4rU=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=sFziSMi21oitQlGFaKahF1pb9EdXetBscEoq4KFQKt7cy3TPN/RIbNOWZEsDXoHY6 lcska8R1fFknkC7gpQOx3xrp/C/xY+OFe/26108To7RJulVLcYVPfY916ridYhtHXo K9BZq5WyBPljpn1vI8rsUvXqU5WLQXkHkzZrQfHZsN+JcxB1BOQHmOsZpN6G5DntEg KZmCQa44x2FpPg8LmgHssoWsHinRIO5duUTpLEGjA5JI8FH5fxH/xt80YSOqGGvC5s 4y775PbSm2Q8N4gnPMs9NACOisooKF5YORHGqUK+q9tZ1KdQ9OQTsP0s7hGEpi8erP Qoue1cPOaocBQ== In-Reply-To: <83r0iwuek9.fsf@gnu.org> Feedback-ID: 92162971:user:proton Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.43.17; envelope-from=jean.christophe.helary@traductaire-libre.org; helo=mail-4317.proton.ch X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:35:57 -0500 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:314573 Archived-At: > On Jan 5, 2024, at 21:53, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >=20 >> Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2024 02:36:29 +0000 >> From: Jean-Christophe Helary >> Cc: Po Lu , Eli Zaretskii , Vincent Be= la=C3=AFche , emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org >>=20 >> We have little translations and translators on the horizons not because >> they do not potentially exist, but because Emacs was always seen as a >> closed English-only system. >>=20 >> Emacs is *the* free software movement flagship. There is no equivalent >> in the history of the movement. Still, it is the one that has >> historically shown the least interest in, or practical commitment to, >> translation and localization. >=20 > This is at least inaccurate, and quite a bit unfair, I must say. The > fact that Emacs does not yet support localized translated messages is > correct, of course, but explaining that by lack of interest and > practical commitment is not. I think even the response of the > maintainers to Vincent's submission speaks volumes about the level of > our interest and commitment. The proof is in the pudding. In 40 years, the Emacs project has yet to=20 publish an up-to-date manual in a non-English language. It=E2=80=99s a fact. And I understand that it comes from the community at l= arge=20 not being interested in that aspect of Emacs. But there are groups that worked on a Japanese manual if my memory is=20 correct. There is mention of a Chinese manual, I know of the French=20 attempt at working on the manuals 20 years ago, and there are probably=20 many other language groups that tried too. Where the people too shy to ask if their work could be included? Maybe.=20 Was the =E2=80=9CEnglish is the language of computer development=E2=80= =9D general=20 stance detrimental to considering these efforts as valuable then? I= =E2=80=99d=20 think that yes. I=E2=80=99m glad that you are strongly stating that Emacs as a project does= not=20 support that view. > Silly things people sometimes say here aside (and everyone who reads > this list should be able to distinguish between wrong or even silly > opinions of some and the official POV of the Emacs maintainers), the > projects that have translations all do it using gettext and the > related infrastructure. All they need is to wrap strings in the > various printf's with _(), and the rest is a matter of having a > message catalog translated to the target language. So it is quite > simple for those programs to provide localized messages. We are really talking manuals here. Not message strings. man pages are translated. Web pages are translated. DocBook or other=20 documentation is translated. Etc. There are millions of words in=20 various documentation formats that are translated to dozens of=20 languages in the free software world. > So before you accuse the project as a whole in being "passively > dismissive" wrt translations, a reality check is in order. The real > reasons are not the lack of interest or us being lazy. I certainly never suggested that =E2=80=9Cyou=E2=80=9D (for any value of = =E2=80=9Cyou=E2=80=9D) were=20 being lazy. >> I=E2=80=99m really glad that Vincent=E2=80=99s commit has actually start= ed to stir the >> pot, because the mere fact that we did not have a location within the >> Emacs sources to put our translations was probably one of the major >> show stoppers for all translation endeavours. >=20 > Nothing is farther from the truth. There was no need to "stir the > pot": as soon as Vincent came up with his translation, he was > immediately asked whether adding that to Emacs would be possible. > That alone should speak volumes of the attitude of the current (and > past) maintainers wrt making Emacs friendlier to people whose first > language is not English. Maybe stirring the pot was not the appropriate expression and I am not=20 criticizing maintainers at all. What is happening now is a very=20 constructive discussion on how to move forward regarding translations.=20 That has never happened in the past (as far as I remember, and checked=20 in the archives), and I think that it is thanks to Vincent moving=20 forward and committing his manual to a place that did not exist=20 before. > It is unreasonable > to expect the Emacs project to solve problems that are common to all > the GNU projects, and accuse us of lack of interest because those > problems are not yet solved satisfactorily. I=E2=80=99m not sure where that comes from. I=E2=80=99m trying to focus on = Emacs=20 manuals. You=E2=80=99re the one who mentioned that TexInfo should be involv= ed. But I=E2=80=99m not sure it is fair to expect translators to wait until=20 somebody comes up with a =E2=80=9Cglobally satisfactory solution to problem= s=20 common to all the GNU projects=E2=80=9D, whatever that means in practice. > See above: the existing communities don't need to solve the problems > that are central to Emacs in this area, they don't even come close. I=E2=80=99m still not sure how documentation translation is so much harder = to=20 handle for Emacs than for other projects. Texi is just another plain text= =20 format that has nothing special to it. > So, while PO is definitely one alternative we should consider, it is > not necessarily the right one for our purposes, certainly when > translation of large and frequently-changing manuals is concerned. There are 2 intermediate formats in the industry and they work very=20 well for any kind of documentation. It=E2=80=99s PO and XLIFF (side note: t= here=20 is absolutely no technical need to use intermediate formats in=20 translation.) Maybe PO was not designed for documentation in the first place, but=20 nothing keeps it from being used that way, and the fact is that it is=20 being used that way. I understand that you don=E2=80=99t think PO is a good solution because you= =20 want to do the translation in Emacs and translating PO in Emacs is not=20 a good experience. It=E2=80=99s OK if the Emacs project does not create infrastructure that of= fers=20 PO as the intermediate translation format. Texi is a fine format and=20 experienced translation teams know how to handle updates, even without=20 IDs attached to paragraphs.