Thread history

Fragment of a discussion from User talk:Михајло Анђелковић
Viewing a history listing
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Time User Activity Comment
No results

I've had an IRC chat with Rancher. It seems like the main part of the discussion is about using imperative vs. infinitive translations. We've had the same discussion for Dutch. In NL, Microsoft uses infinitive, Apple uses imperative for menu items.

It's really important to get consensus on this, because using this in a mixed way creates very confusing user interfaces.

I think getting it written down properly what the alternatives are, getting consensus with more than the two of you -- there are more than two translators for your language, right? -- and then sticking to it, and fixing whatever currently differs, will solve this problem.

UI translators must stick to conventions, otherwise users suffer. Please keep that in mind.

Siebrand12:58, 11 August 2012

Yeah, the other part is about error messages and actions in progress, but let's focus on this one for now.

I chose the verbs "Otkaži" and "Odustani", both meaning "Cancel", in testing purposes. Just to let you know, "Otkaži" and "Odustani" are imperative forms (the first number in the brackets below, which shows how many results are there for that form), while "Otkaz" and "Odustajanje" are noun forms that Mihajlo uses. (18:0)

Microsoft (10:0)

MyMemory (6:0) (13:0) — this one is actually Croatian, but they are using the imperative form in this purpose, too.

This means that there are no results AT ALL for the words in noun forms in the context of buttons. By the way, Google is using imperative too, of course. Just look at YouTube or Gmail.

P. S. Take a look at Serbian portal page.

Rancher (talk)14:08, 11 August 2012

Here I am, back from a good weekend.

Siebrand, you're right getting consensus on this should take more than me and Rancher. Otherwise translatewiki might be getting some translations fuzzy over and over, when sysops stop by to edit a few translations (yeah, doesn't happen too often). Since my time for this rally is up, I'll give directions what is best thing to do. Taken that the conventions should be created in collaboration with the community that exists on the, here is how we're doing it:

In short:

  1. A proposal should be written and posted there as a subpage. Also a post in the village pump should be made so that people feel invited. My suggestion is Rancher makes it better defined, stated and elaborated than the page here.
  2. Let us have it discussed.
  3. If people agree it is fine to go out like that, we'll have it voted. Otherwise, it will need to be amended.
  4. Successfully chosen policy can be copied here. Everything else will need amends.
  5. That's called a legit policy.

Sounds fair, eh? ;) In case Rancher refrains from insulting phrases like the ones I pointed out up there, the process will probably not be delayed by having him blocked over and over.

Mihajlo talk08:15, 13 August 2012

I don't think this is the correct way to go. The Wikipedia community of editors isn't needed for input on localisation of software -- not only MediaWiki, but all products that are being translated in

To keep things simple and short, I think you should approach whoever has contributed to the sr translations here in the past. Portal:Sr will contain a partial list. You can send them an e-mail and leave a note on their talk page.

Siebrand11:25, 13 August 2012