Discussion in 'Glossaries discussion' started by mkellogg, Sep 7, 2005.
For those who have questions about this forum, please post them here!
Stupid question No 1. (I´m sure I´ve read all the instructions, but apologies if I´ve missed something).....
What is POS ?
I believe it's Part of Speech (noun, adj., adv., verb...)
Will the constant attaching of a spreadsheet deplete my attachments space?
In fact we have set it up so that file names do not matter. If the manager were to use the file merge function, each file copy would require a different name. We found a way to make the names a point of indifference.
So...you may leave the names alone or change them as you wish. But please!!
Do not change or edit or overwrite any data in the file you download. Just add whatever you please.
I'll let your question vex and perplex a higher authority, as I don't know the answer. He should be along soon.
Here is another question from an anonymous forero in a PM:
Ask any other forero or a Mod to co-volunteer with you. The thread manager really has very little to do...just review the posted sheets, make sure nothing has been deleted or overwritten, and if needed, tidy up and post a 'clean' copy from time to time.
Also, if a strong disagreement starts up over a definition or translation, suggest that people take that discussion to the language forums, and once it's resolved, bring the answer back here for inclusion in the glossary. (Or just duck, and ask any Mod to help you)
Hmmm. Good point Venus!
I've just doubled the allowed attachment space to 200,000 KB. I need to investigate how we can keep these attachments from counting against the limit, too.
About the file numbering:
Even if not absolutely necessary, it's, in my opinion, strongly recommended (not to say more) to add 1 to the current version number before posting a new copy.
It makes the thinks much clearer for everybody:
- Easy to understand which version the poster has started to work from
- Doing so, easy to detect cross-posting (two different files that have the same name have been made in parallel from the same source)
So I vote for making official this way of working (and written in the sticky).
I'm happy to agree with Olivier's good logic, but I prefer it be a request or suggestion rather than a rule. Why? We are trying to experiment with and follow a "wiki" style here, and make participation by all as easy and attractive as we can.
Those without spreadsheet skills may find a long list of detailed rules intimidating.
Right now, our rules are sort of simple
2. don't change, add
If we can keep it that simple, that may yield a happy collaboration.
I still like Olivier's idea.
Should I add 'colmillos' before replying? Or...perhaps take them off.
Premise: It is a logical fallacy that sequentially numbered files are created from the previous file in the number sequence
Cross-posting occurs in V7, V8, V9, with a word deleted and replaced.
The manager will have to look at versions 9,8,7, and 6 to find what has been changed. If they are not numbered, the time stamp of the posts will allow the manager to know the sequence in which they were created.
Neither the timestamps nor the numbers will tell the manager which "source" file was used as the basis for versions 7,8,9. All of them may have been based on version 4 or 5! Version 6 may be based on version 3.
Suppose the origin/source and results files are like this:
2=>6 and delete/change occurs in #6
# 8 will include the illegal change, but #9 will not
We can get so strict as to do record - thread locking, or just let this 'go wiki' and see how it works in the real world. If it's a total anarchistic mess, we can bring some order. If not, we can just leave it alone.
I have to disagree.
The key point is: your file has to be numbered according to the version you start working from, and not according to the last number at the time you post it.
- Bob starts to work on it, by adding a "Klingon" column
- Peter starts to work on it too, by adding a "Venusian" column.
- Peter posts his file, numbered v7 (the version he downloaded +1 )
- Bob posts his file, numbered v7 (the version he downloaded +1 )
- Then 5 posters continue to work from the last file (Bob's), posting up to version 12.
When the manager reads the thread after three days of vacation, he sees immediately that the Peter's (or Bob's) changes can be absent in v12, because Bob and Peter's files have the same number.
If the files are not numbered, he has to download the 7 files one by one, being very careful because they have all the same name, and to see in each of them what changes have been made, and whether they have been kept in the next one... Tough job, really. On a popular topic, I wouldn't dare manage this.
Every time I open a spreadsheet to view/edit it, I am prompted to enter a Username and Password for the Network. Is this a WR thing, or is it just my computer? . . .
A million pardons for the abundance of questions, but I have another...
I began a furniture spreadsheet. As the one who began the thread, it's my job to continuously update it, right? Ok. But, I can't simply alter the original that I added in the thread. I would need to alter the spreadsheet that is on my hard drive on my computer, and then re-attach a newer version, right?
Can I edit my master copy as an attachment?
Hola Srta P.I.N
If nobody ever makes a mistake in following your proposed numbering scheme, life will be a little easier.
What happens if...
peter v7+>George V8
Georgev8=> Oscar and Dolores and Fred Vs 9
HenriqueV=> Matilde and Olivier and Benjamin Vs9
Will it not still require the manager to review multiple files?
There may be many copies titled V12, half of which repeat a mistaken deletion from v7.
Might we solve (!) this by turning on 'track changes' so that any change to an existing column is immediately visible?
You and I are the best proof that the proposed "Rule" will not work. Mike has provided a thread for Discussions and another for Spreadsheet Q&A, yet we ignored that and are having our Spreadsheet Discussions in a Glossary thread!
Humans don't always follow the rules, (especially Mods? ), so the manager will need to review all the sheets. Thus, why have a rule if we cannot guarantee that it will be followed, without doing what the rule is intended to avoid? Logical dilema. V2.343.
Why can't we delete old attachments from these threads ... I mean we only need the updated version, needn't we?
See the fun discussion that Olivier, Laura and I are having in the "Head" thread.
It may make clear that the updated version may or may not be accurate and comprehensive.
I just moved the messages about file numbering here.
As soon as two posts have the same file number, the manager knows that at least one of them has not been taken into account in the next posts.
He then has to review:
- The last file that has been posted
- Each file whose number is present several times.
- And all the files that have been posted since the cross-posting, just in case.
But in most of the cases, there are not several files with the same name, so nothing to do...
That happened to me too, Venus, until I downloaded the file onto my computer before reading it. Then that prompt disappeared.
Ok, Oliver, let's discuss.
1- I think that adding an article before the word helps us t understand better the word's gender. Basically, it came to my mind when I added two translation for the same word, one masculine and one feminine. You don't agree on this? Why? What do you suggest?
2- I also think that we need a subforum considering that this is very experimental. So far, we are discussing 500 different topics in one thread only. Are my concerns, then, off-topic because they don't follow the initial question?
I'm very interested to see what comes out of this.
Two translations for the same word would need two separate lines, IMO.
Adding the article:
1- Is not of help in all languages. In French for example, "les" is the plural for both feminine and masculine. Writing "les moustaches" and "les sourcil" won't tell the reader that the former is feminine and the latter masculine...
2- It would make the Excel file more difficult to be processed by a program if, in the future, these glossaries have to be included in a database.
I agree at 100% with this one!
Wow, lots of questions. I don't have any answers just now.
Cuchu and I are testing whether "Track Changes" will accomplish much of the version control for us. Hopefully so!
I see. You're right, then.
I'm taking the liberty of restating objectives, as background to the version control discussion:
1. Make this forum inviting to all would-be participants, regardless of level of Excel knowledge.
2. See objective #1
3. Minimize workload for volunteer thread starters=managers
Do we agree so far? If we do, we can usefully continue to seek the solutions to
either or both of
I just looked at the latest state of the 'head' file, and I feel really silly.
Why do we need to repeat the POS for each language? Isn't our purpose to translate nouns for nouns, verbs for verbs? If I give a Portuguese adjective, and someone tries to offer a verb in another language, that would be a bad translation, I think.
Can we eliminate all but one POS column?
I know that the order of the Spanish vocab and grammar forums were switched to prevent new foreros from posting translation questions in the grammar forum. Perhaps, this new glossary forum should/could be relocated as well? Any thoughts? . . .
Good idea Venus,
In fact, Mike put this forum at the top of the main WR menu as sort of an announcement of its existence. It's his plan to move it elsewhere in a while.
So far we have had only a single mis-placed vocabulary question. Keep your fingers crossed.
just one thing with that. i have noticed that with en fr translations fr often prefers a noun whereas english plumps for a verb. i have had some serious headaches trying to get parts of speech to match in the past. lets not chuck them just yet. please?
The issue also arose in the SP/EN dictionary supplement, but only in regard to English gerunds. These were sometimes translated as infinitives.
They can be and often were translated as present participles. Can you think of any other case in which this is an issue?
example: En: going down, Sp: bajando....or....bajar
I think I forsee a problem . . . .
In the furniture thread, I am every now and then, updating the original spreadsheet. But, those who are adding are adding to older versions of the spreadsheet.
Should be we adding to the newest (and most correct) version of the spreadsheet?
For example . . .
The very original spreadsheet that I began wasn't alphabetized. Since then, I have placed the English column in alphabetical order. However, when people add their entries, their spreadsheets aren't in order, and don't include our recent changes.
We all foresaw that problem Venus...One of the very few things a manager needs to do
is try to synchronize all the copies floating around.
Yes,absolutely! Even though it may not be the most correct--someone may have deleted entries....
You raise a really interesting point. If a manager adds a consolidated spreadsheet that includes all the additions of all previous versions, should we then delete the older spreadsheets to reduce the chance of more mixups?
Her thoughts are... "What on Earth made me start the "furniture" thread?! sniff, sniff :'(
I was thinking that one spreadsheet should suffice, and in fact, would eliminate confusion regarding which one to pay attention to.
I was (actually, am) having a problem earlier because people were updating the older version (an un-alphabetized one). So, all of the sheets thereafter have been wrong out of order. In addition to this, people have since added new English words. Then, some included the article, some didn't. Some versions added a new line for more than one translation for a word, some didn't. I can't wait until everyone's on the same page . . . .
Mike told me that the latest post should have the most up-to-date version of the sheet. Ay, ay, ay. But, I think that the very first post should contain the most up-to-date one.
MJ: Yah, basically! je je
Forget the first post. Keep you own local copy as a master, and add all the later stuff to it, then repost it.
I don't like the idea, but we may have to, from time to time, close a thread for an hour or so, to give the manager a chance to get caught up, and post a 'clean' new master coppy.
I'm still wondering if, once the new master is up, it might make sense to delete the earlier sheets, thus eliminating the possibility of propagating errors.
I created a summary of the outstanding issues in this thread.
Venus, I agree with Cuchu that we should just have the last post as the latest version. Otherwise people are just going to be confused more than normal.
And thanks for being a guinea pig!
Separate names with a comma.