Re: [L-A Lokalisointi] Portal domain name and development

On Fri, 5 Mar 2004, Tero Kuusela wrote:
> Yes, but I seem to recall we all considered a .fi domain a better
> alternative and lokalisointi.fi was taken, which, as was stated in =
the
> meeting, could create a lot of confusion. It was also noted that
> "lokalisointi" as a term says next to nothing to a common computer =
user and
> they are one of the target groups for this portal (e.g. to report b=
ugs and
> see which packages are fully translated).

That's true. However, there is no good alternative common use transla=
tion for
localisation and I would hesitate a little with "informal" names such=
 as
"suomeksi.fi". It's not terribly bad, but still.

The name lokalisointi is currently used also with the mailing lists a=
nd the
IRC channel, and it's probably the most correct one. Nevertheless, I =
would
favour on using a different primary title on most communications, as =
is with
"kielenk=E4=E4nn=F6sty=F6paja".

But I guess it's ok if you get the suomeksi.fi name for the L-A colla=
boration
site, especially if we like to keep two separate sites.

> Why not? We can put it to point to the current localisation page un=
til
> we have the portal if wasting it is your concern.

That might be a good temporary solution.

> There is no need to make pages that "work with TWiki" if you refuse=
 to use
> it at all. Although, as Aschwin somewhere pointed out, the portal l=
ayout you
> have made would be easy to convert to TWiki, which would allow easi=
er
> editing through a web-browser to any group of volunteers here who w=
ould like
> to help in maintaining the site.

Developing a website through only a web browser interface is not very
convenient, especially if some programming is needed. Well, that's of=
 course a
problem with any CMS.

But, as I suggested, installing the website under CVS in L-A's web se=
rver
should solve that problem.

> And you were even given the offer that someone else would do that f=
or you.

Just converting the basic layout is probably an easy task (a few hour=
s), so
that's likely not a problem. The problem is who is going to maintain =
it. If
someone else makes a commitment to take care of the portal and its de=
velopment
as his responsibility, it's perfectly fine for me. But if someone jus=
t
converts it to TWiki and then expects that I start developing it unde=
r TWiki,
I have to say I'm not interested.

> If you don't plan on changing the layout radically several times in=
 the
> near future, I don't see the problem in using TWiki to keep the con=
tent
> up-to-date. But that's just me, perhaps others here have other opin=
ions.

That's another reason why it perhaps shouldn't be converted to TWiki =
or any
other system quite yet. The layout and especially its implementation =
are still
developing. Just last week, Jan rewrote the layout with xhtml, which =
I now
implemented. There's a good chance we have to rewrite it again.

Also, if L-A makes a change to another (real) CMS, we would have to c=
onvert
everything again.

So it's better to start with a simple system first without any CMS. W=
e could
think of it as a prototype.

And, it's possible to keep all L-A activity in the separate "collabor=
ation
site", and I continue developing the current portal as a separate pro=
ject
(some of the content has actually been under that URL since last Augu=
st). That
might be a nice solution, as I probably want to leave my responsibili=
ties as
the leader of this group soon anyhow (because I don't have time for i=
t). That
way, I can do things that I have time for the way that is easiest for=
 me.

> As I understand it, you were already offered the chance to get the
> layout converted to TWiki by Aschwin and just having to take care o=
f the
> content together with the rest of the localisation working group.

As I tried to explain earlier, the layout and content are not that ea=
sy to
separate. With systems like TWiki, you can do it a little, but TWiki =
is best
suitable for situations where you don't need any special web applicat=
ions.
With programming, or with a real CMS, you can do a lot more, but sepa=
rating
the layout from content well still needs a lot of programming. It's n=
ot just
about writing a simple style sheet.

> Wrt maintaining the site, I don't think TWiki would be too hard for=
 you.
> Just press the edit button, give your username and password, write =
text and
> save your changes. And you even have a template for adding a simila=
r item
> than some other one in the page (e.g. news item) right before your =
eyes
> while editing. Compared to CVS, I don't see how this could be subst=
antially
> slower unless you have a slow web connection.

That's certainly a nice way if most of the content is written by diff=
erent
people and most of the content is just plain text. Such a system has =
its
place.

But let's see... For example, if I want to to export my dictionary to=
 a text
file and convert it to say 29 pages (one for each letter), I need to
copy&paste all those 29 pages separately to an edit box, click click =
click
click.... That takes something like...15 minutes, for every update. I=
t gets
difficult. If I just type a command that copies them, it takes 5 seco=
nds.

> > That way, people at Linux-Aktivaattori would also be satisfied to=
 have the
> > site under their systems.
>
> L-A provides resources for it's working groups. Generally, it's a g=
ood idea
> to use the available resources instead of finding new ones.

As I explained earlier, the resources are highly depedent on how easy=
 you make
it for the people to help, and you shouldn't force people too awkward=
 routines
if you want to get anything done.

Certainly it would be nice if others can help and cooperate, but the =
reality
is that so far I've bee providing most of the content and doing most =
of the
development, so I'm the first person you should ask, "how can we help=
 you?"

But then, this L-A effort seems to be asking for more resources right=
 now than
it's giving, and I don't currently have time anyhow for this. So perh=
aps it's
best if somebody else in L-A can take care of this administrative stu=
ff and I
can continue working independently as an ordinary member.

> Note, _it's_ working groups. You are not separate from L-A, althoug=
h you are
> free to leave it if the group so wishes.

I wonder why you emphasize that. When we started the working group la=
st year,
I argued for being "officially under" L-A because an association prov=
ides an
appropriate channel for funding and such. That doesn't mean the effor=
t has to
be bound to it in other ways.

This may again be a difference in thinking. I am thinking of the work=
ing group
mostly as a joint effort between the translation groups, not simply a=
n L-A
project, though it was begun as such. Perhaps I have been looking at =
the
effort from a more general perspective, where could be used as a mode=
l for
other countries. I also want make this an effort which the translatio=
n groups
can think of "their own". People like things which are their own.

My conception of the localisation working group is to *serve* the ind=
ependent
translation groups, to get them tools, resources and publicity, not t=
o bring
them under "rule", which your emphasis on "it's" above hints about...

Of course, those are just my ideas.

I noticed in the draft of L-A's mission statement some aspects which =
I didn't
really agree with, and which may be part of the issue at hand. We mig=
ht have
slightly different perspectives in these matters. I don't think L-A s=
hould try
to be a "roof organization" for every possible open source project. I=
 have a
hunch that L-A could be more attractive if it drives to keep the proj=
ects as
independent and as distinctive as possible, as people involved in the=
 projects
often appear to like to stand out independently. But I could be wrong=
.

> But, at least currently, L-A does not force working groups to use t=
heir
> resources.

That would be good.

So, there is a good solution for the portal problem: L-A makes its ow=
n site,
where you can collaborate more easily, and I continue developing thin=
gs on my
own site which are easier for me to develop there, such as the dictio=
nary and
so on.

-- Marko Gr=F6nroos, [email protected] (http://www.iki.fi/magi/)