Machine Translation
Doug Ewell
doug at ewellic.org
Sat Sep 12 23:39:09 CEST 2009
CE Whitehead <cewcathar at hotmail dot com> wrote:
> Personally, I'd like to be told when I retrieved a document whether it
> was a human translation or machine translation or original, and if
> either of the former, where the original was lodged--if it is lodged
> online, and particularly so before I put the document through an
> online translator. (For example, if I retrieved a document translated
> from French to English with a machine, and I were a native speaker of
> French, and I put it back through a machine to get a French version,
> that would be ----- dumb, I guess.)
>
> The w3c's policy for translations--requiring at the top or bottom of a
> document (in a header or footer that 'wraps' the document) a statement
> indicating that a document is a translation, the the original document
> is the normative version of the document, and with the URL of the
> original document--does result in this information's appearing in
> search results (this is helpful!). I've not been able to locate much
> about translation policy otherwise online but note that joomla
> translations does have a translation policy:
All the complexity described here does tend to imply that BCP 47
language tags might not be an appropriate place for declaring
"translated mechanically" after all.
I hope some of the feedback on this list is being relayed back to
Debbie's colleagues who requested this in the first place. Maybe they
would be satisfied with a higher-level protocol such as this.
--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s
More information about the Ietf-languages
mailing list