![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
> -----Original Message----- > From: John Stracke [mailto:francis at ecal.com] > Probably worse than nothing, unless there are much better > translators than babelfish out there. WG discussions get > down to really niggly points; a translator that doesn't > work *perfectly* is likely to make things worse. At > least today, if we're talking through a language barrier, > there's a human brain doing the translation, able to > recognize problems and rephrase as needed. Via babelfish.altavista.com, and translated from English to German and back Probably falsely than nothing, it is it many better compilers/translators than babelfish gives out there. WG discussions down on really arrive niggly points; a compiler/translator, that does not operate * perfectly * is probable to form things falsely. At least today, if we speak by a language barrier, a human brain give it, which does the translation, able, to detect and again-formulate problems, how uses. And English/French/English:- Probably worse than anything, unless there are translators much better than the babelfish outside there. The discussions of WP descend really niggly at the points; a translator who does not function * perfectly * is likely to make things worse. At least today, if we speak by a linguistic barrier, there let us be a human making translation, able brain identify problems and reformulate them like necessary. You can see the decay in the clarity of the original message. If I had received something similar purporting to be from an IETF member in a country that I didn't speak the language of, I would assume someone had reinitialized Mark V. Chaney. cheers, Stewart
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.