From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laura Lazzati Subject: Re: GNU Guix Video Documentation Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2018 20:26:31 -0300 Message-ID: References: <20181025235334.7ebf5970@alma-ubu> <87efcd5oqn.fsf@elephly.net> <20181026120004.5b99860c@alma-ubu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54908) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gGuSe-0001aT-Ox for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 19:27:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gGuSc-0001na-Ry for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 19:27:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor_Boskovits?= Cc: Guix-devel , Ricardo Wurmus On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 5:20 PM G=C3=A1bor Boskovits = wrote: > > Hello Laura, > > Laura Lazzati ezt =C3=ADrta (id=C5=91pont: 2= 018. > okt. 28., V, 20:15): > > > First, we need to know which have the highest priorities, the > > promoting, the howtos, and belonging to which topic(s). And in case > > both (the ones "promoting" as well as the "howtos" are equally needed, > > I believe that maybe the screencasted one is more appealing, even > > taking into account that they are difficult to translate or update if > > they get stale, but it also implies in the worst case creating only > > one 3 minutes lenght video again on each topic. > > And then, for the "howtos", I don't know how many 3 minutes length > > videos will be required for each topic, or the depth of them but the > > non-screencasted I believe is better, as most of you mentioned. > > But I kind need to know which are more important at least for now. > > Recall I am new to Guix :) > > I believe one of the most important part of this discussion is to set > these priorities. It might worth to start a new thread for explicitly > this, but we can also keep the discussion here. What do you think > would be preferable? Yes, please, because based on that I will send you the timeline :) And I would like to show you the first version ASAP. Sometimes threads get too long and messy. Because when we end up replying to a certain part then at least I miss what was before, and need to read the whole thread to end up writing "X said...". We could write like a summary of all this thread of mails and start from that point, WDYT? > > > I still have to do more research on texinfo, I read the Reference > > Guide, but maybe even the slides can be generated with it -LaTex has > > Beamer, for instance, there has to be something similar to it. > > LaTex and Beamer are prefectly acceptable, especially if you are already > familiar with them. (You will need texinfo to work with the manual) Also, > currently texinfo lacks some translation capabilities, > you can ask Julien Lepiller (a.k.a. roptat) on the status of these, but a= s we > control the whole process here, these might be ignored. I am think about > generating code, tests and documentation from the same source for a > while, but that is a whole new story :-) Great! Yes I need more explanation on this last part. But let's open another thread if possible :) Maybe I could contact Julien on IRC channel. > > > > It would be nice to have the ability to translate on demand in the fu= ture. > > > The second version of the graph I have posted is created with keeping > > > that in mind, that is one of the reasons why it has so many selection= and > > > composition steps. (Another reason is to have a versitality of output= s). > > Great. I don't know if the translations will be automated and with > > which tools - Ricardo mentioned that the non screencasted had, among > > the benefits, easier translations, but I don't know up to which point > > they will be automated. I read about the tools for the localization > > of the command line commands, but the audios and text (both subtitles > > and the slides) will be that easy to translate with scripts? That's > > why I though about texinfo- i don't know if by slideshow you mean the > > non-GNU slideshow or any other tool. > > The audio translation would have to be done using a recording, > video+audio of a narrator, we can't actually do any better :-) > The only thing I propose here, is to break down the recoding to > short cuts, so that we can do this in smaller parts. That's why I > presented this part as a 'set of clips' in my description. > > The subtitles translation can be done using a base subtitle file/ > subttile database and a separate set of translation files. That > way the translations can simply be sent to translators, and > work can be parallelized, like it is done for guix, and the manual. Ok,let me see if I am understanding. For the audio, some people will have to say "I speak X language" and narrate that part, By video you mean for screencasted, like changing the people that appear? I thought that maybe only replacing the audio was OK. When I did my little research about concepts for videos, I read that you can mute the original video, and add another voice, even if the lips don't match, and even add the options of choosing subtitles (For example: have the video with English speaker and choose not to add the subtitles, or add english/spanish/french/choose whatever language you like, too, even some of them are made with extra comments like [writing on a board] - I don't remember the name of that - or have the video in Spanish and do the same. For non-screencasted translating the slides and CLI comands I thought it was easier. I could do the spanish translations, at least for the subtitles, but if we can parallelize that, the better. > > Best regards, > g_bor Regards! Laura