I want to have a group in Plone that can only translate for 1 specific language. Is this possible? And if yes, how?
Use case is that there are quite a bit of languages in a site, and that the translators can only translate for their language.
Not without very substantial customization. With some code added, you could make the translate drop-down actions smarter, so that they only offered particular languages to users from particular groups. That might give you what you need.
If you need security to match, it would be harder. You'd have to intervene (via code) after translation creation to set sharing.
So, possible yes. Practical, probably not.
If this is a very high priority project, and you have resources available, get in touch with the folks working on the next generation of LinguaPlone, and offer to help develop (or to fund development) for the feature. That might be the very best way to make it happen.
Actually — this doesn't have to be so hard.
By granting the translator add and edit permissions in the required language subfolder, and not in the other language subtrees, this should all simply work.
The only real need for customisation might be to hide the translate actions from the menu if the user doesn't have permissions to translate to there.
Related
HTTP_ACCEPTED_LANGUAGE allows a browser setting to determine the preferred language a website is displayed in (which can lead to some uncomfortable user experience do to mixed-language display when a framework is translated but the contents are not, or when it's only a bad auto-translation). I was hoping there was a way to display websites preferably in their native language if it is among my preferred languages, but there is a requirement I don't know whether it exists:
Can a browser be informed about a website's native language via HTTP? (Using the TLD, or worse, geolocation, doesn't count since that can be wrong especially for individual user-sites)
If you are asking about browser, the answer is yes. Just set the Content-language header on the server side and browser will know the language. The problem is, I don't think it will give you anything.
But you seem to be asking what is the real language of automatically translated web page. No, there is no such thing. And personally, I don't think it should be. I understand your problem, but there is no way to create idiot-proof protocol. The universe will just make better idiots.
That said, using automatic translation on the web site as default rather than optional is one of the most stupid ideas I've ever seen. Personally, I would not even attempt to use such web sites.
I'm just getting started using Resharper with VS-2008, and one of the 'errors' it gave me was to localize a Label's text in the code-behind. I've worked with Localization before to Localize a website from english into french, but I don't understand what the benefit is to localizing beside that usage.
If it's an internal application that you're not going to be distributing, there's not much of a benefit to it. It may be handy to collect all your strings in one central location for easy maintenance later, but only you know whether that's worth the effort on your specific project.
That's a bit like asking what the benefit of addition is beyond adding two numbers together.
Localization is generally about presenting the most relevant user experience to each user with minimal code changes - giving each user a "skin" using their language and regional settings (e.g. for things like formatting numbers appropriately).
Granted very many web sites aren't localized at all, but R# is prompting you do give your users the best possible experience :)
Are free and open source templates, themes, self content management systems replacing the need of web designers?
You can find templates online for pretty much anything these days. There are html and css templates, templates for Wordpress, all sorts of different cms templates, e-ecommerce templates, etc. Many of these are pretty cheap and some are even free, so where do web designers fit into this picture? I’ve had many clients and potential customers ask why they should use my services instead of just buying a cheap template. Are web designers being replaced?
Are they all forcing web designers to reduce prices of service?
No. Where does the free templates come from?
No, because a human web designer can tailor a project for a specific need, whereas a template will always have restrictions. A web designer can make something unique that stands out from the crowd.
I think that templates and other similar systems make it easier for a potential client to make an uninformed, rash decision that may save them money up front, but will eventually be something they regret.
Not really, they reduce the burden of the designer so they don't have to do as much work. In some cases you can directly implement one of the ready available templates, put the client's data and its all good. But most of the times you'll end up modifying the design to the clients requirement(considering the client accepts a ready-made template). Here you'll need design skills. Also consider even though there are a large number of templates available, there are finite and if you're looking for something very specific - a template will just not cut it.
So weather you work alone or at a firm - Design skills and Web Designers are essential and will remain so.
If your potential customers are okay with the current selection of open source templates, designs and CMSs, go for it.
You still need to customize and deliver as a web designer/programmer. Does the open source projects offer free support? I doubt. People still need someone to do the job as well.
Web designers are not being replaced. If your work is worse than open source web designers and you don't offer any customization or support, you might be replaced.
There will always be a need for web designers. As Letseatfood said, a designer can custom tailor to fit a project to a client's need. There are also so many services offering "Do It Yourself" websites, but they can't replace designers. Some small businesses might go with a template or a DIY, but the final product will not be as good as a custom built website.
And also, if you aren't finding enough clients for custom websites, you can always try making templates to sell, haha!
If you want your site to look and act like everyone else's, then you don't need a web designer. However, if your site has the same "product" as everyone else, how do you differentiate yourself aside from price?
Free template only bring you up to the same level as everyone else. You need your own designers to give you the edge.
I know that most people will consider this post as irrelevant, and yes, I've read tens of posts saying that Wordpress is "just a blogging platform". However, facts speak for themselves - people do use Wordpress a lot. Moreover, large projects are being developed using Wordpress as the underlying platform. Who doesn't believe it could check the showcase. Even my team has developed a couple of magazine websites full of rich media and different content types.
The point is: what can we do to make the development, and management process even easier? I hope that this post will draw the attention of Pro wordpress users and a lot of plugins, extensions, and techniques will be posted here. Please, do not hesitate to share your experience, if you have done a project with WP that is way out of its "blogging only" capabilities.
Thanks.
You're right, Wordpress can be extended to do anything. After all it's just a database with functions that put stuff in and take stuff out. Speaking from experience, I found that the API is pretty robust and can accomplish anything you want to, however, it's probably better to spec something out and build it yourself using a more agile framework like RoR.
Sometimes less is more.
It is amazing how much one could achieve using simple concepts such as posts, pages, categories, tags, and custom fields. The thing that I do not like in many content management frameworks and more advanced CMSes is that they often hinder development by putting too much abstraction on top of simple concepts like these. With Wordpress I could prototype a site in less than a day, again due to simple templating options which, of course can be extended on demand.
No one says that code should be written here and there with no structure at all. The thing is that WP API allows enough options to add abstractions when and where needed.
I remain a clear proponent of the use of WP for bigger projects than originally intended. All that is necessary is a little twist of mentality.
Of course, WP is not without its drawbacks. Its strongest side, the plugin community could turn out to be its weakest one, unless measures are taken to educate newbie plugin developers about some good practices. I've worked with some great plugins that fail in users's eyes because of weak API and integration hardships. Nobody would care about functionality if they cannot integrate the plugin at all, right ?
Anyone sharing any of this?
Two pretty good plpugins for extending wordpress beyond blogging are flutter and pods that allow you to do more with custom fields, in pods case much more.
this is my firts post here ever.
I have to develop an aplication for a group of people with special needs. The functionality is really trivial, however, i have no clue of how to do the interface for them to be able to use it.
Their intelectual habilities are perfect, they are actually studying high school, but one of them types with his nose which needless to say, is very dificult and another one types reaaaaaaally slowly with only one of his fingers and neither can use the mouse.
I was wondering if i could use javascript to develop a usable interface, based on huge grids or something like that or maybe you guys have a better idea.
Political incorrectness aside, why don't you ask them? You're talking about accessibility here, if they're using computers they must be able to tell you about what they like or dislike about user interfaces that they've encountered.
I'm going to split my answer into two parts - design and implementation.
From a design perspective, it's important not to be intimidated by the fact that the users use a computer in a different manner. Treat this like any other project. Observe how they currently use other apps, and ask about the kind of things that they find helpful, or have difficulty with. If they claim nothing is difficult, ask a teacher or assistant, who will be familiar with the kind of things they struggle with.
Once you've started implementation, try an idea and get initial feedback. If you simply ask how they find the prototype, they'll likely say it's ok. Instead, try observing them using it without saying anything or giving guidance. If they get stuck, let them find their own solution to the problem. If appropriate, you could ask the user to speak their thoughts out loud (e.g. "I need to save this form, so I'm scrolling to the bottom, and clicking save").
On the development side, try to use web standards (valid HTML, CSS and Javascript). People often point to the "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0" (WCAG2) but this is quite turse and hard to understand; there are many more friendly articles on "Web Accessibility".
Someone with a physical disability is likely to use an alternate input device, such as a "Switch", onscreen keyboard, head-tracking device, a device for pushing keys on the keyboard, or speech recognition. Many of these methods involve simulating the keyboard, so by far the most important thing is to consider the accessibility of your site without using a mouse. For example, try tabbing through the page to see if you can access all elements in a reasonable amount of time. Consider using the acesskey attribute to provide an easy way to jump to different parts of the page (using 0 through 9 is often recommended so you don't interfere with browser shortcuts).
Also make sure that no part of your site is time-dependant, as different users may take different amounts of time to perform a task. For example, don't use the onchange Javascript event to update a page based on a listbox selection. Ensure you have alt text for images, so it's accessible for speech recognition. make the pages short enough so that excessive scrolling isn't required, but not so short as to require following lots of links.
Those are just some ideas to get your mind going in the right direction - but there are many accessibility resources on the internet - steal freely, and don't reinvent the wheel.
I realise I haven't addressed your question about Javascript - that's because I think it's probably one of the less important considerations. If possible, use Progressive Enhancement techniques to make the site work with and without Javascript. You might also look into the WAI-Aria standard for giving semantics to your Javascript.
And finally, to reiterate my initial point - make something simple, show it to the users, tweek, and show again.
It doesn't really matter what technology you use. Use whichever suites you.
But, make sure that you make UI components BIG in size(Bigger buttons, bigger font, bold font, coloured font(are there any colour blind?). This is for the ease of use of people (you said someone types with nose).
Also, better to have audio as informative source along with the usual screen display whenever some wrong action is performed on the application. This way visually impaired people will be assisted more.
Do it well, you are doing a divine job.
The first thing that you should read up on is the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines written up by the W3C.
In a nutshell this document describes the basic principles for people with disabilities in general.
For your needs regarding persons with special needs, you might want to look at Jakob Nielsen's article on Website Usability for Children, wherein principles of web design for young children or people with otherwise limited cognitive ability are outlined.