John <john@neodoc.biz> schrieb am 10.05.2011

> There is an English team (of 3), at least 2 of whom are native

> en_GB speakers, listed on the translators page.

Yes there are, but they are non responsive. When i18n work began, they were beginning to setup a team, but then we heard nothing more from them.

>

> It seems kind of pointless to have separate teams for the various

> en_xx locales when in reality there are only two flavours of

> English (en_US and en_GB). The basic difference between these two

> flavours being spelling, so why not setup a generic en_i18n for

> problems such as this?

We wouldn't need two teams, just one team that is responsible for en_GB and en_US would be enough, but we need to have those people first.

>

> It also appears that there is no mechanism to ensure that the .pot

> files are checked for spelling and grammar before being passed to

> the various translation teams.

It would have to be a team that is VERY responsive. Or we would have quite some bottleneck in i18n work.

Do you have such a responsive team at hand?

>

> Is there a policy which states what the default locale is for .pot

> files?

I don't know, we have quite some mixture of en_GB and en_US there iirc, shortly we corrected the en_US "dependancy" to the en_GB "dependency" because some people thought it was a bug. But as long as we don't have such a policy, you can't really say, which one of those is the bug.

I think discussing this is definitely something to discuss AFTER mga1 release.

By the way, we have spelling differences between de_DE, de_CH and de_AT as well, but I never heard Austrians or Swiss complaining about de_DE spellings in the software and I think correcting those spellings is a "nice to have", but only if we have volunteers doing it...

Oliver