Re: [Koha-translate] Some questions

[Axel Bojer]

Joshua Ferraro wrote:
> Hi Axel,
>
> Some answers to your excellent questions follow:

Thank you!

> On 1/17/08, Axel Bojer <address@hidden> wrote:
(...)
> > with just a small effort in scripting these copies could be erased.
> > I suppose some hundred, if not more, of the strings could be omitted by
> > correcting such mistakes. I know I can search and replace (Kbabel and
> > Kaider), copy and paste -- or even just use the translation database
> > (Kbabel), but for the poor people using the web interface this is not
> > easy to do. So if someone could take a look at this we could ease the
> > translation job for everyone :-)
> Agreed. I will attempt to do this for 3.0 beta.

Very good!

> > Then for some mystic strings that I don't quite understand the meaning of:
> >
> > Bibs -- Is this a Unique Name and therefore not translatable? I could
> > not find it on Google or Wikipedia.
> Bibs is an abbreviation of 'Bibliographic Records'.

That makes sense :-)

> > mc:v or mc-rtype:o
> > and more of the same sort, are those really to be translated, and what
> > do they mean? No added comment there, that could have helped :-)
> Those are 'material category' and are mainly just CCL codes, you can ignore
> them as they are used for the internal search API.

Will do :-)

> > moon script -- What is this? I know what Braille is, but moon script?
> This is a real script, identified by the Library of Congress apparently ... :)

In the meantime we found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_code

so perhaps it should be rephrased to moon code?

> > road type -- We are not talking about cars, are we, so what is it?
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_road
> We are talking about street types (such as 'St., Rd., etc.). It's a
> feature in Koha
> that you can have authorized value lists for road types.

Really? hmm ... ok :-)


> > reconcillation -- What is this according to Koha?
> Reconciliation (yes it is misspelled), is a term that has to do with the current
> day's activities I believe (transactions of the day). Someone else might know
> better than I.

Some sort of unification, we thought:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Reconciliation

So probably, then, some way to unite something:

<a1>Home</a> &rsaquo; <a2>Reports</a> &rsaquo; Till Reconciliation
would perhaps, then, be the unification/merging of two different reports 
into one? That is our best guess by now  :-)

Perhaps also here a rephrasing (into some of the more well known (close 
to be) synonyms mentioned)?

> > BTW: How do we give credits to the translators? I see some names in the
> > staff-file, but no string like: Translator or similar, like KDE has. Do
> > you add this, and do we then have to submit all the names of our
> > translators to you to get it in? We are a group of four, maybe five
> > translators, mainly because we have two writing languages :-P
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian
> Please tell us who was responsible for the translation, by posting a mail
> to this list (koha-translate). I will add the credits to the 'About'
> page for the
> Koha 3.0 beta (I already have a list of some of you, but obviously if you want
> credit you must identify yourselves as a contributor :-)).

We are:

Norwegian Bokmål: Axel Bojer and Thomas Gramstad
Norwegian Nynorsk: Unni Knutsen and Marit Kristine Ådland

We will tell you if there are changes, but I suppose that will be it :-)

> Thanks again for these excellent questions, let us know if we can help further.

Actually, one more right away -- about the html-encodings :-)

In Norway we don't citate with "word" but with «word». I see many 
places, that &quot; is used instead (in English). Do we, then, have to 
change ours into &raquo; and &laquo; everywhere, or will « and » be 
recognized? I thought of doing a search and replace for all of them at 
the last moment before submitting, just to be sure everything is viewed 
correctly, or will some of the text be rendered differently than by html 
(just text f.i.), so that we will have to use « and » somewhere too?

I suppose &ndash; (or &mdash;) will be better than -- too, will it not? 
I found this in many strings ...

Best regards
Axel Bojer