WordPress.org

Andrew Nacin 2:43 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink Reply
nacin  

• 

  Remkus de Vries 2:45 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  Used it a lot. For Dutch the basic translation was not too bad and a good base for the proper translation.

  • 

    Chantal Coolsma 3:53 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

    I don’t use it at all for Dutch. Can live without it.

• 

  Zé 3:00 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  We (pt_PT) have no use for it. It’s generally (and consistently) inaccurate, and a nightmare for validators. There’s this, too: http://glotpress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/170

  • 

    Andrew Nacin 3:04 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

    It probably should no longer be in GlotPress core, but we can pull it into a plugin, and we’re willing to switch to the paid version if there is demand for it.

    • 

      Zé 3:06 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      I can live without it in core or plugin (update: in its current form). This is what we should be looking at: http://support.google.com/translate/toolkit/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=147863

      • 

        Remkus de Vries 3:12 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

        I can live without it as wel, but for larger texts it was a handy starter. Not enough for me personally to warrant a paid version.

        • 

          Andrew Nacin 3:50 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink

          It would cost us basically nothing for the scale we’re doing it at. Don’t weigh that in a decision.

  • 

    Rafael Poveda - RaveN 3:21 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

    We can say the same for es_ES. It’s inaccurate and mixes all-sites spanish (Venezuela, Peru, Spain, etc). And some newbie translators are used to ‘Translate all with Google’, which gives much more work than empty strings.

    We are not going to miss this button ^_^.

• 

  Zé 4:00 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  A more detailed take, from the point of view of latin languages (I understand that languages closer to English might not have the same opinion):

  • It’s a poor quality machine translation
  • It mixes variants of a language on the same text, i.e. European Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese, not to mention pre- and post-ortography reform within the same language
  • Whatever gets mistranslated, is always mistranslated in the same way, GT doesn’t learn
  • Contributors are too often tempted to click the GT button and leave it at that, especially when there are lots of strings to translate. This is a nightmare for validators, who end up having to do it all over again

  In short, some kind of GP-internal glossary functionality would be way more useful than Google Translate or Bing Translate (which suffers from the same ailments).

  • 

    Zé 4:07 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

    …GP-internal glossary functionality

    similar to PoEdit’s Automatic Translation using Translation Memory, which would be teh awesome.

    • 

      Kenan Dervišević 9:40 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      +1 on this, excellent suggestion

      • 

        Torsten 9:44 am on March 14, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        See this ticket: http://glotpress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/39

• 

  Remkus de Vries 4:02 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  I suppose that a lot of our bad translations might stem from people using GT. Not sure, but when I think about it is sounds logical. It’s only a good tool when you know how to handle it I guess.

• 

  Toru 4:17 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  Never used if for translating to Japanese. Google translation is ok sometimes to just to get a grasp of what some sentece say, but usually useless for “proper” translation. Personally, not going to miss at all.

• 

  yuraz 6:05 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  I didn’t used it at all for Croatian because it’s inaccurate. I can live without it, won’t miss it.

• 

  Mattias Tengblad 7:59 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  I can live without it, GT is ok for Swedish but still has a lot to wish for. It was kind of useful for larger texts like Remkus de Vries pointed out.

  Totally agree with Zé ^

  GP-internal glossary functionality similar to PoEdit’s Automatic Translation using Translation Memory, which would be teh awesome.

• 

  Xavier 9:50 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  fr_FR translators hardly ever use GlotPress (sorry!); we rely on the tried-and-true Poedit+SVN formulae, which is how we like to work (yup, we’re old and grumpy). We also tend to translate everything by hand, and not rely on anything automatic (not even Poedit’s tools — hence my non-opinion on Zé’s suggestion re: Poedit’s ATuTM).

  In general, I use translate.google.com (not GP’s button) for three contexts:

  single words, in order to get multiple suggestions.

  unknown expression, in order to understand a specific part of a string (remember the “kitchen sink” button? Good times!).

  Lonnng strings, in order to get started by correct something badly translated instead of the whole text itself.

  It is my opinion that none of these three context can be properly answered with the “Translate from Google” button. As others have noted, it brings further risks of having lazy contributors just click the button and leave it at that in order to be done with it quicker, which really hinders the improvement of the whole translation.

  Ergo, I’m all for dropping it.

  • 

    Sergey Biryukov 11:00 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

    I’m currently using Poedit too (suits my workflow best). Never used GT button.

• 

  Carlos Eduardo G. Barbosa 10:10 pm on December 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  Never will use it. It’s a guess tool, not a translation tool.
  Never will miss it.

• 

  Gabriel Reguly 1:33 am on December 19, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  A glossary would be of more use, if it is possible to ask for one.

• 

  Rami 10:43 am on December 19, 2011 Permalink | Reply

  i was using it a lot, although the auto-translate requires many changes, it saves me time. i would like it back.

• 

  Torsten 10:54 am on January 15, 2012 Permalink | Reply

  It was a time saver if you start a translation, but it is a time killer if you have to reject/correct bad translations (if a newbie just clicked the GT button …). I would like to have a button for auto-translation, but it has not to be GT. An internal GlotPress solution would be the best.

• Hello everyone I’ve made some changes and I… « GlotPress 4:13 pm on May 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

  [...] all the references to translate via google. I see the post in WP Polyglots talking about the Translate Google API and I think that it’s a good idea to [...]

• 

  brasofilo 6:13 pm on May 18, 2013 Permalink | Reply

  For the casual reader starting with GlotPress (or not), here’s a mini gp-plugin to get rid of Google links:

  
  add_action( 'gp_head' );
  	}
  	function gp_head() {
  		echo '.gtranslate {display:none}';
  	}
  }
  GP::$plugins->glot_no_google = new Glot_No_Google;
  

  • 

    brasofilo 6:16 pm on May 18, 2013 Permalink | Reply

    ahh, sorry… the <?php tag mangled the code… another try, if doesn’t work, <a href="https://gist.github.com/brasofilo/5605328"here's a Gist

    
    class Glot_No_Google extends GP_Plugin {
      function __construct() {
    		parent::__construct();
    		$this->add_action( 'gp_head' );
    	}
    	function gp_head() {
    		echo '.gtranslate {display:none}';
    	}
    }
    GP::$plugins->glot_no_google = new Glot_No_Google;
    

    • 

      brasofilo 6:17 pm on May 18, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      let’s leave it like that ):(