AW: [wg-e] Translations

["Andre' Zehl" <zehl@berkom.de>]

The approach to take the UN languages is a good start. On the other hand, if
we try to go for effectiveness, I could also imagine to have a look on how
many Internet users we reach by translating to certain languages.
Key question would be of course, how to figure out how many Internet users
there are for one language, since detailed numbers are not available. A
possible approach could be to use a host count list (like the one from the
Internet Software Consortium
(http://www.isc.org/ds/WWW-200001/dist-bynum.html), using only ccTLDs
numbers) - being aware of the limitations, there might be others around.
From such a list, we could identfy an arbitrary number of countries (say 10
or 15) that we would include. Additionally from such a list we could cluster
countries that we reach with certain languages (e.g. with german we would
reach Austria, Switzerland and Germany), so the list of top 10 or 15 would
include more countries. This is of course more complicated, but if we feel
UN languages are not sufficient, this could be one approach.

Regarding translation, I see that if we limit the number of documents
(pages) we feel are really important, it would reduce the obstacle to find
volunteer translators for many languages. A core set of documents could be
translated in lots of languages, while huge amounts of pages would be hard
to translate for volunteers (and probably not read by many peoply anyway). I
would think that large companies, that have professional translating
services in their companies, could easily help with the translation, for
many european countries at least. The question would remain, how to decide,
if this is an officially approved translation.

Best regards,
Andre'

andre.zehl@telekom.de


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: owner-wg-e@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-e@dnso.org]Im Auftrag von
> Kilnam Chon
> Gesendet am: Mittwoch, 29. März 2000 23:04
> An: Bill Washburn; 'jelliott@tucows.com'; R.Gaetano@iaea.org;
> wg-e@dnso.org
> Cc: Ohashi Yumi; zakaria@univ-nkc.mr
> Betreff: Re: [wg-e] Translations
>
> bill,
>
> let's look into japanese and arabic first unless german and italian insist
> to be included.
>
> chon
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 06:06:33AM -0800, Bill Washburn wrote:
> > The way I see it, we doubtless have to agree on the pragmatic
> reality that a
> > quite limited number of translation languages is the most that ICANN can
> > possibly afford or coordinate in the near term.  I further
> agree that the UN
> > official languages makes sense as a starting point.  I have two
> concerns,
> > however, to express.  First the UN list ignores both Japanese
> and German--a
> > vestige of the World War II origins of the UN, I assume.  This is not
> > something to perpetuate, IMO.  I'd propose that at least
> Japanese needs to
> > be included in the list of languages--at least if is true that Japanese
> > citizens tend to be monolingual (as is true with most U.S.
> citizens).  The
> > other concern I have is leaving African languages off the list entirely.
> > There is precious little ICANN involvement by Africans as it
> is.  I don't
> > relish the idea of leaving the languages of Africa entirely off
> the list as
> > it would seem to be a sure basis of perpetuating under participation by
> > citizens of African nations.
> >
> > As far as the situation in terms of ICANN coordination in concerned, I'd
> > suggest that we ought to pursue an agreement with Andrew and the ICANN
> > board, perhaps, whereby additional funding is sought from
> Markle (or others)
> > to fund professional level translation services for a one year
> period.  This
> > would help ICANN get translation off the ground sooner rather
> than later;
> > would help immensely with the outreach and awareness
> objectives; and would
> > have the side benefit of demonstrating just how translation makes a
> > difference financially and politically in the operation and
> administration
> > of ICANN.
> >
> > cheers, bill washburn
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Josh Elliott [mailto:jelliott@tucows.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 9:16 AM
> > To: R.Gaetano@iaea.org; bill@realnames.com; wg-e@dnso.org
> > Subject: RE: [wg-e] Translations
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, it seems most documents that come out of ICANN
> are legal in
> > nature, and so it will be difficult to expand translation
> service past 5 or
> > 6 languages.  On the other hand, Diane's idea that ICANN could like to
> > translated versions which are done on a volunteer level regionally could
> > work.  The problem with volunteers is their commitment level - I am the
> > perfect example of that as this is my 2nd post to this list in 3 months
> > (something which will improve starting today).
> >
> > I think officially, ICANN should have translation done into the
> UN official
> > languages, and then have links to unofficial translations done
> on a regional
> > level.  That way, we can get African dialects included, but not have to
> > choose who gets to be official or unofficial.  I think the key
> to unofficial
> > translations is funding.  If ICANN can provide some funding for
> unofficial
> > services (some sort of grant program), then it will probably
> work a bit more
> > efficiently than if it was dependent on unpaid volunteer efforts.
> >
> > The other problem here is having these efforts coordinated at
> ICANN.  The
> > staff is already overworked and has no time to do this, but we
> need someone
> > to spend a few hours a week making sure this is done properly.
> >
> > That is my 2 cents.
> >
> > Josh
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-wg-e@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-e@dnso.org]On Behalf Of
> > > R.Gaetano@iaea.org
> > > Sent: Monday, March 27, 2000 12:35 AM
> > > To: bill@realnames.com; wg-e@dnso.org
> > > Subject: RE: [wg-e] [owner-wg-e@dnso.org: BOUNCE wg-e@dnso.org:
> > > Non-member submission from [Bill Washburn
> <bill@realnames.com>] Message
> > > too long (>40000 chars)]
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > #1 In what languages do you feel the ICANN web site, election
> > > > ballots, and
> > > > other materials should be translated?  Please order your list
> > > > of languages
> > > > in priority.  Also, I will assume that if you list only one
> > > > language then
> > > > you feel that is all ICANN needs to do.  If, on the other
> > > > hand, you list
> > > > five or 10 or 15 languages, then I will take it that you feel
> > > > that is the
> > > > number of languages which ICANN must cover.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I believe that the basis should be the UN official languages (with the
> > > caveat that different UN Organizations have different
> official languages),
> > > therefore at least English, French, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, Russian.
> > > For a reference, see http://www.un.org/.
> > >
> > > I also think that we should include other widely used languages, in
> > > particular if they are important at a regional level.
> > >
> > >
> > > > #2 How do you believe that translation of the web site and
> > > > other materials
> > > > should occur?  If you believe it must be done by a commercial
> > > > translation
> > > > company, please provide any details on a company you know or
> > > > feel would be
> > > > productive.  If youbelieve it can be done fast enough and
> > > > with sufficient
> > > > quality by volunteers, please give specifics about how such a
> > > > volunteer
> > > > system could work over say the next 12 months.  If you
> > > > believe there are
> > > > non-profit or even government organizations that would be the
> > > > best resources
> > > > to utilize, please give details what organizations, what
> > > > officers, what
> > > > locations and so forth you have in mind.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I believe that we have two separate problems: the "official"
> > > documents, and
> > > the "less official" documentation material (see also comment
> to #3 below).
> > > For official documents, that may have even legal relevance,
> there is no
> > > other way than go to professional translators, but for general
> > > documentation
> > > we can easily rely on local structures.
> > >
> > > Please allow me to open a parenthesis.
> > > We need to define a "model" for DNSO/ICANN membership and organization
> > > before being able to answer this question.
> > > If the model is ICANN-Staff-at-headquarter-centric, i.e. if
> everything is
> > > managed centrally from Marina del Rey, well, the only
> possibility is to
> > > collect enough money to have it done professionally
> (volounteering may be
> > > scarce).
> > > If, OTOH, the model will be more decentralized, with regional
> offices and
> > > "chapters", that are coordinated from LA but with large
> authonomy on local
> > > (or regional) initiatives, these local chapters will be
> incentivated to
> > > publish material in their own local languages, and will find
> > > themselves the
> > > best way to do it in a most cost-effective way. Also,
> volounteering effort
> > > will be incentivated in this latter case.
> > > The advantage of the second model from the strict "outreach"
> POV, is that
> > > local structures can address the type of material (not only
> the languages)
> > > that are more adapted to the local culture. The "cultural
> barreer" is not
> > > just the language: you can sometimes provide the best
> translation possible
> > > of a document that is foreign to the local cultures, and still make it
> > > incomprehensible.
> > >
> > > I am not sure that to discuss about the structure of DNSO/ICANN
> > > (centralized
> > > vs. decentralised) is in the charter of wg-e, but sure it is a
> > > key question
> > > that changes the approach of outreach.
> > >
> > >
> > > > #3 I understand that ICANN feels a legal concern/obligation
> > > > to ensure that
> > > > translations are certifiably correct.  By what means do you
> > > > suggest this
> > > > kind of "verification of accuracy" occur?  Do you have or do
> > > > you know others
> > > > who have experience in this matter?  (On this particular
> > > > point I am going to
> > > > ask a colleague, Francis Gurry at  WIPO if he has any suggestions.)
> > > >
> > >
> > > As noted above, the problem with documents that imply legal
> > > obligations will
> > > be separated from the mass of documents for information.
> Legal documents
> > > will be a tiny minority (at least I hope) of the material that will be
> > > produced.
> > > For legal material, I believe that ICANN will never accept to
> engage in
> > > obligations to have more than a handful of languages (like,
> for instance,
> > > the UN official languages).
> > >
> > > As for the experience on this subject, the reference should be the
> > > International Organizations, with the UN System in first
> place. They all
> > > have professional translators in the official languages, that
> have to be
> > > accredited (pretty much as you have "official" translators
> accredited to
> > > every Embassy or Consulate). BTW, the translation is one major
> > > item of cost
> > > in the UN budget, so be aware of the economical constraints
> if we go the
> > > path of professional services.
> > >
> > > Please let me know if you want more details on the translation. I can
> > > provide the IAEA data (I assume they are public, I will
> check), and assume
> > > also that the UN Secretariat in NY will have a documentation
> service that
> > > has data about the translation (how it is done, how much does it
> > > cost, ...).
> > >
> > >
> > > >     The reason I am asking these questions is because I
> > > > believe that Working
> > > > Group E can contribute very effectively to the Global
> > > > Outreach and Awareness
> > > > mandate of the DNSO and to the ICANN Membership at Large
> > > > Implementation Task
> > > > Force work by answering or recommending answers, at least.
> > > > Also, I believe
> > > > this will help us immensely to begin to formulate some
> > > > estimates of costs to
> > > > be shouldered during the next 12 months in the translation of
> > > > materials, web
> > > > site translation, maintenance, and so on.  Of course I am
> > > > only aiming to
> > > > help in the larger effort of our group and I sincerely
> > > > apologize if I have
> > > > made a mistake in missing a question or if I have spoken
> out of turn.
> > > > Thanks you all very much for bearing with me in this long
> > > > message and I hope
> > > > that you can find time to answer these questions.
> > > >
> > > > Respectfully, bill washburn
> > > >
> > > > Bill Washburn
> > > > Chief Policy Officer
> > > > RealNames Corp.
> > > > bill@realnames.com
> > > > voice: +1 650 298 5520
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
>