Use Esperanto when no translation

Use Esperanto when no translation

Currently, whenever a string is not translated into io/ido, the English equivalent is shown. Can we fallback to Esperanto instead, which should be intelligible to most ido speakers?

Nemo (talk)18:29, 29 November 2016

Give that Wikipedia states "It is the most successful of many Esperanto derivatives, called Esperantidos." that seems almost like a no-brainer.

Siebrand13:05, 1 December 2016

While I speak them both, I know that some Ido speakers do have some difficulties with Esperanto. But as a fallback it's probably more pallatable to Ido speakers than English. Also it will probably stimulate them to complete the translations xD.

LaPingvino (talk)23:37, 6 December 2016

Fully agreed!

NMaia (talk)09:53, 7 December 2016

I am active only in Esperanto, so I am not the best person to make recommendations regarding Ido speakers. But I know LaPingvino and his language capabilities well so I tent to support the proposal.

KuboF (talk)17:23, 8 December 2016

Mi pensas ke ĉiu idisto Esperanton komprenas, iel ajn por ili pli facilos Esperanto ol la Angla. I think every Idist understand Esperanto. Ist easier for them understand Esperanto than English.

Sahaquiel9102 (talk)02:34, 7 December 2016

Well, it seems closed now. I personally have no experience with Ido, so my opinion is not an very informed one. Thus said, I agree with the general consensus, that Esperanto make a better match for Ido fallback than English.

Psychoslave (talk)10:25, 7 December 2016

I had a look at the Wikipedia Ido article in Ido, and I find them rather transparent. Thus said, as far as I understand, the fork was mainly conducted by French locutors, and French is my native language, so I might be helped with some bias toward French traits. But maybe we could also set a fallback from Esperanto to Ido. I'm not sure that it is so much interesting, as Ido community is probably far smaller, so I would expect that the Ido version have far less content to fallback on. There is also the wikitrans stuff, that might be interesting to fallback in, that's an automated rule based (as opposed to statistic based) translation of the English articles. But it would require more thoughts on how to integrate such a fallback.

Psychoslave (talk)13:48, 7 December 2016

We could make the reverse fallback as well, but since even MediaWiki core is only 25 % translated into Ido such a fallback would mostly be symbolic.

Nemo (talk)13:56, 7 December 2016

What about the wikitrans translations then?

Psychoslave (talk)14:07, 7 December 2016

I'm not sure that wikitrans has to do with language fallback in MediaWiki. For automatic "translation" of page content, we have the LanguageConverter, which has nothing to do with language fallbacks of the interface.

Nemo (talk)14:12, 7 December 2016

WikiTrans is good as a Software-as-a-Service backend for ContentTranslation but it's use for fallbacking interface would be bit strange

KuboF (talk)17:26, 8 December 2016

I think as well, that Esperanto is for most Ido speakers more understandable than English.

Petrus Adamus (talk)10:05, 8 December 2016

I agree to use Esperanto as fallback to ido translation. Mi samopinias al la aliaj.

Cfoucher (talk)21:43, 9 December 2016

I agree.

Joan Francés Blanc (talk)18:26, 27 December 2016

By the way I just compared the io and eo strings and found that about 10 % of the io messages are identical to that of Esperanto. 97 % of the messages translated in io are available in eo.

There are sometimes small differences in diacritics and similar, for instance linguo vs. lingvo or autoro vs. aŭtoro, which should not impair understanding, and some mere differences in lexical choice, like licenza vs. permeso.

Some of the io strings which differ most from eo seem to be in Italian, actually (e.g. «Puoi scegliere la licenza che preferisci»).

Nemo (talk)06:32, 18 January 2017

In Esperanto, at least according to PIV, you actually can use licenc/o, which is also worded as "permis-il/o".

Psychoslave (talk)15:49, 19 January 2017