Cambiar la traducción Latinoamericana a traducción por cada país latinoamericano

Saludos a la comunidad, en el grupo de telegram estuvimos exponiendo casos donde la traducción única es_419 para los países de Latinoamérica no resulta aplicable a todos, pues identificamos términos que tienen distintos nombres en cada país. Por tanto: No seria mas provechoso y efectivo tener una traducción por cada país es_XX, basados en la traducción española, donde solo se incluyan las peculiaridades de cada país? Doy un ejemplo: La traducción inglesa de “Delivery Note”, en españa esta como “Albarán”, pero en los países latinoamericanos tienen distintos nombres “Guía de Remisión” en Perú, “Nota de Entrega” en Venezuela, y así en otros países. Si el objetivo es que cada país tenga Tryton completamente localizado en su terminología, creo ayudaría mas tener uno por cada país, antes que uno solo para Latinoamérica.

I do not think it is a good idea to multiple the translations because the result with will many partial and incomplete translations.
Based on your example, I’m wondering if it is not just a matter of taste. I do not think we must use the “standard” term (which often does not match correctly with Tryton) but the term that describes the best the concept.
Also the language mechanism will make any es_<country> not inherit from es_419 so every common translations will have to be duplicated.

Finally I often found that translators try to change the original meaning of the term with their translations supposedly for more accuracy with the country. But indeed they just reduce the Tryton concept to a small part of what it is.

I note that the translation “en_419” today is partial and incomplete, so far I would not change anything about translating for each country.
I can assure you that it is not a matter of taste, considering that the objective of the translations, in my concept is the total and/or better understanding of the users in their own terminology and language, it does not seem to me good enough to use a translation not understandable in its totality by the users of diverse countries. I think it is not about describing the concepts but about understanding them. Wouldn’t it be better that the “es_XX” inherits from “es” (I don’t know if it is possible), eliminating the “es_419”. It would not duplicate anything, translating only the strings that differ from the “es” specific to each country by the communities that require it.
Finally, all translations are perfectible in time, and as more people use Tryton, there will be a process of refinement and spontaneous revision, we can trust that this process will take place, and if a Peruvian understands “Delivery Note” better as “Guía de Remisión”, I believe that an English speaker, besides not being Peruvian, cannot tell them that it is not correct.

In such case is better to join efforts to finish the common translations instead of spliting them into multiple efforts for each country. In such case there are more odds to have multiple incomplete translations.

For me we should focus on join efforts in the “es_419” and once it is complete we can always have any “es_419_xx” for each country if really required.

We can not trust that something hapens until somebody finishes working on it.

This is on purpose because it inherits from es.

Then we do not agree. The translation is about translating the Tryton’s concept.

No this is the goal of the documentation.

It does.

es_419 exists because no matter what you said, it is recognized that Latin America Spanish is mainly the same language.

Again I do not agree. A good translation should not need to be refined if it is done correctly. Indeed correction happens each time the translator is trying to do more than translating like describing, complete or customize.

This is not a valid code.

The translators of es_419 must only set a translation if the term must be different from the es translation. Normally they know that. So es_419 will never be complete.
It is a pity that weblate does not have a better UI for such derivative language.

Is “es_419” complete today? We don’t know, maybe yes, maybe no, as it is derived, only the strings that the translator considers different from “es” are translated, and there are many translators, so the final result is very relative, there may not be a consensus. So the argument of having an incomplete translation in this context is not valid. The same would be true for the “es_XX”.

I consider this more expensive, to make an “es_419” and on top of this an “es_419_XX”, I do not recommend it for obvious reasons.

I agree with translating the Tryton concept, but we must look beyond that, it does not end there, we translate to understand, and it is better understood when a concept is read in our own words derived from Spanish. Using the “es_419” we will partially meet that goal, but we can meet it completely if we let each country have its own set of 100% understandable words.

I did not say that Latin American Spanish is a different language, it is still Spanish, but we must consider that for Latin America there are variations in each country where the translation of an English word is not the same for all of them. If as you say we must translate the concept, that same concept is not expressed with the same word in all countries, therefore the translation “es_419” would not be fulfilling the objective you mention. At least I consider all opinions are important

Everything is revisable and changeable in this world, nothing is written in stone including a translation. One of the main characteristics of free software is customization, it is not bad for the user to customize the terminology used in an application, for better understanding and this can be done at the level of each country. Why should we insist on restricting this freedom? We should each one worry about the language we use, and leave the freedom to the community to define their own translations in their language including variations, is what I think.

The main problem is that there have been no update in es_419 since 2019. So it looks like it is unmaintained. I do not see how dividing will make it better maintained.
The Latin American Spanish must team up to build the best es_419 translation and once this is done and maintained we could consider adding more languages. But for now I would be more in favor of removing es_419.

Also before adding new derivative languages, we need that weblate manages them better because the current workflow will not survive with a lot of translators.

I think the biggest problem with es_419 is that it can’t never be a good translation for all latin america countries. As @fsanchez said we all have differents ways for calling the same thing.

In Argentina we call this Remito and really no one of us understands the original spanish word Albarán. Maybe a lot of other things of the spanish translation are clear for us but we really need to use a different word for this. The same problem happens with the credit notes that are called “Abonar” from the Invoice actions and this is very very confusing for us (in Argentina at least) because we use the word “Abonar” as a synonym for “Pagar” (Pay) and this is not the same than creating a Credit Note.

As @fsanchez proposed I think the best way is to have very little traslations for each latin american country were we just change the words are not clear for us and hereit from es translation all the other terms and translations. In fact this is what I have in my Tryton.

I hope was clear.

We must think why it is not updated since 2019? Is it because it is not useful to Latin American Spanish speakers? If we pool everyone’s efforts to do something that doesn’t benefit everyone, it doesn’t seem efficient to me, it would be better if we let each country do it focusing on its own terminologies, only translating those that differ from “es”.

For me the best should be that you creata a glosary of most common words for each country so we will be able to know which are the shared terms and which not.

For now, just an example of one different word has been given, but probably there are more shared words that separated. So if we do not know which is the current status.

Also this will be a good starting point to find who will be able to work on the translations for such countries.

Let’s see, let’s focus the discussion. Objective: To have the location of each country 100% personalized (Liberty 1 of free software). Current situation (what is real today): A single location for all Latin American countries, many “unhappy”. Does it meet the goal? Nope.
Proposal: Let each country have its own location with its own terms at 100% and everyone “happy”.
Which of the 2 is better? Reasons please.
The communities of each country will take care of having the updated location.

There is no need to discuss further as long as we do not have proper tool for dealing with derivative language.
At some point I’m thinking about removing es_419 because clearly it is not well managed and can not really be.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

Just for reference: Skipping empty strings? · Issue #1920 · WeblateOrg/weblate · GitHub is the weblate issue for improving derivative languages support