On 2013-10-02 6:23 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
On 27/09/13 07:26, Francesco Lodolo [:flod] wrote:
Mozilla manifesto is currently localized in 35 languages, do you expect
these locales to follow the same principle you're applying to en-US? I
could be wrong, but for most of them that's not going to work. The
result will only be less clear messages that won't fit in the 140
characters limit anyway.
I think the answer probably is that the translation should prioritize
accuracy over length.
I fully support that, but we are in an exercise here to do the opposite
for english Twitter users; prioritizing length while puzzling out how to
best maintain accuracy.
So, here's an idea: let's treat "Twitter English" like its own language.
What we're trying to build here, then, is a translation effort rather
than a rewrite.
Some of you have heard me going on about this already; I think that
modifying the manifesto to fit the arbitrary constrainst of a
proprietary service is not the right thing for a lot of different
reasons. Mitchell's reply, though - that she "would publish the
manifesto as a pdf doc or other formats if that meant people would see
it and start to think about it" - is a strong argument, as is the
implication that a document has to be accessible to be relevant.
I think if we were /only/ publishing the Manifesto as a Word document
that would be one thing, and I'd go back to looking for a flag to hoist
and sand to draw lines in and so forth. But if we keep the original,
time-tested and Web-accessible Mozilla Manifesto proudly as-is while
providing the best possible translation for other formats, languages or
contexts, Twitter included, that's another thing altogether.
And yeah, in my opinion we should definitely do that.
- mhoye
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
