question about technical terms and translations

[Salvador Cuñat]

Good night.

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 07:06:01AM +0000, Pedro Neves wrote:
> On 07-03-2017 04:47, Miika Turkia wrote:
> > I am quite sure it depends on the language. I.e. divelog and divespot
> > I would translate, but MOD, END and setpoint I would not, unless
> > someone who is familiar with Finnish diving  vocabulary tells me what
> > they actually should be.
> > 
> > > My experience leads me to believe that they SHOULD be translated because
> > > there seem to be a lot of divers who aren't familiar with the English
> > > terms and English abbreviations.
> > Having them as translatable strings gives the translator the freedom
> > to do as he please. I.e. I have just copied over some of the terms and
> > translated those that I have good terms in Finnish. I have to admit
> > that it was a problem before I realized that I can do just that.
> > Anyway, I am quite certain that in some languages it makes sense to
> > translate them and in some others it does not.
> > 
> Hi:
> 
> In Portugal, we tend to use the english abbreviations for MOD, EAD, etc.
> (although, as Pablo mentioned for Spanish, I've seen some translations for
> some of the terms).
Agree with the majority, they should be kept translatable.
Here  in Spain I've seen translated acronims and the opposite,
depending mostly of the certification agency. Those more tech diving
oriented keep the english acronims and words, while those more
recreational diving oriented translate as much as possible. So, in
spanish translations, I choosed to translate those which I'm quite
sure I've seen translated (SAC -> CAS, MOD -> PMO, END -> PNE ...) and
kept in english those which never saw (setpoint, EAN ...).

Best regards.

Salva.