Hello Jan (and whoever else receives this, I'm not subscribed to all the mail-lists on CC)
Yes, it's quite possible that the initial translations might not be "good enough" -- and ultimately since machine translations today still cannot usually provide better than word for word literal word substitution, "good enough" is probably best defined as understandable although not with the smooth idiomatic linguistic structures that can best be provided by a human being.
What machine translation can provide is the ability to get the proper meaning across, to communicate an idea properly. And, if human resources aren't available, this is better than no communication at all.
As for accuracy... Particularly for short, "standard expressions" that crop up again and again in the types of documents we produce, Web-based translations provide a means for anyone to submit an improvement or correction. Assuming that Google or Microsoft or whoever is used as the Translation Partner properly evaluates, accepts and implements suggestions for future use of the same expression, we should expect that within rather short order future documents should be translated extremely well.
If there is any interest in openSUSE/SUSE to investiggate the capabilities of this technology, a project should be designated that can properly evaluate whether machine translation is worthless or promising and if desired I am willing to shepherd it.
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Jan Engelhardt email@example.com wrote:
On Tuesday 2012-09-11 23:20, Tony Su wrote:
Highly recommend posting machine-translated copy using either Google Translate(http://translate.google.com/) or Microsoft Translate(http://www.bing.com/translator)
Both are free and only take seconds then ask for a native speaker review to clean up any idioms and colloquials.
The time to weed out the bugs of automatic translation is close to doing a non-automated, more targeted translation. Especially the farther east you go on the globe (Japanese TL with Google is pretty much unusable in either direction) and/or dealing with highly-technical words (and fillers) - which the announcement is in no way short of, like "Call For Papers", "to keynote", "to kick off", "workshop", "track", "session", "usability expert", and (obviousisms like) "speakers talking".