Forum .LRN Q&A: .LRN Meeting summary Dec, 5 2006

Collapse
1: .LRN Meeting summary Dec, 5 2006
Posted by Raúl Morales Hidalgo on 12/06/06 12:46 PM
Present:

Christian, Dave, Don, Emmanuelle, Olga, Raúl, Rocael and later Carl and Gustaf

Previous summary:

https://openacs.org/forums/message-view?message%5fid=501313

Agenda:

  1. Next conference(s)

    2. May 2007 in Austria and November in Guatemala, Gustaf and Rocael Will check possible dates

  2. .LRN 2.2.1a1/a2 status (and testing needs PG 7.4 + oracle)

    3. .LRN 2.2.1a1 installed fine save 2 minor bugs that are now fixed, further testing will be done this week.

  3. Translation server - we need to publicize it

    4. We need to get more people involved with translating, as we only have good support for english, spanish and german. Carl will look into how to publicize it. A message in the forums before releases and pinging old translators were also sugested.

  4. Translation server - Can we make it more reliable?

    5. We will wait for Victor to discuss this in depth, but maybe a reinstall is in order to prevent some packages from crashing.

Next meeting

The hour and date for the next meeting has changed, it will take place on <font color=red>Wed November, 13 2006 at 16 GMT NOT on Tuesday</font>

Collapse
2: Re: .LRN Meeting summary Dec, 5 2006 (response to 1)
Posted by Emmanuelle Raffenne on 12/06/06 02:14 PM
Thanks Raul for the summary.

The correct date for next meeting is Wed December (not nov), 13 2006 at 16 GMT (1 hour before the OCT meeting).

Collapse
3: Re: Res: .LRN Meeting summary Dec, 5 2006 (response to 1)
Posted by Carlos Delgado Kloos on 12/06/06 11:12 PM
Hi,

in relation with the translation, often the same concept appears in many strings with different translations. For instance, in the Spanish (ES) translation, "File" is sometimes translated with "fichero", sometimes with "archivo", and sometimes with "documento". Moreover, there are sometimes differences in capitalization. It would be good to have a more abstract approach, so that changes could be made globally, and in a consistent way. An ontology is needed that would define the translations at least for often appearing concepts. I have been unifying some of the strings in our local instance, but I see that the approach taken is too ad-hoc and not scalable.

My two cents. Can somebody comment on this?

Carlos