Shoutbox

"It is by no means as easy as you think. Ampersand collision checking is very complex. Even checking if an ampersand is missing or not is very complex."

I never protested against that. In fact, I said that I didn't know whether or not the feature could be programmed.

"Such a feature is not to be taken as granted. Human control and interpretation IS needed."

I never asserted that human control wasn't needed. In fact, I said that it would not make errors disappear.

"Be very carefull with trusting such features/programs. I see some translators here only trusting on Choli's application to do their stuff because it is so "easy". This is however a very bad use of the program."

It may well be, yet I'm not adressing the "Choli/.txt"-problem, I'm merely making a suggestion to aid those who are using Choli's translator. I'm not saying that everyone should use it. Why should I?

"The program is NOT meant to do full translations. It is meant as an aid to do some quick checking and quick translating. And it is excellent for that. However, translations which are made only with Choli's translator can easly be picked out because they are often full of errors and inconsistencies. Every key has to be manually checked within Messenger Plus!, consistency is to be taken in account, etc... etc..."

You're asserting that translations made with the translator are always faulty? I don't think that's true. However, I can easily see why you could come to that conclusion; because it seems quite obvious that lazy translators will be more likely to use the program than the traditionalistic, hard-working translators. But many of these lazy translators will do poor translations no matter what method they use. If the translator pays attention, Choli's translator will be as useful as the method you're currently defending, even though no one (no one here, at least) has attacked it. It shows the same things as the textfile-method contains.

"The best tool to do a good translation is still notepad or similar. Choli's translator or any other similar program are simply made to aid, not to take over the translation-process..."

I guess you're trying to do an information campaign here. But doesn't that belong in its own thread, where it would be read by those who need to be adressed? And not here, as a reply to my thread, which makes it seem like a weird pseudo-attack on a personal opinion that was never uttered?