POEditor vs. GlotPress

[james]

@james

Get to 0 QA errors by a combination of fixing our existing translations and improving the QA checks.

This probably isn’t going to be feasible since the QA checks are not very customizable unless we rewrite them ourselves.

@james

I am waiting to hear back from the Crowdin team on two related points:

• How to filter translations to only those which do not have any QA errors (doesn’t appear to be possible at the moment, but should be easy for them to fix)
• Whether they can provide the logic for their existing “Special characters” QA check as code that we can modify to our needs (would save some time)

The first of these is in their development queue, but we need to move forward with this anyway.

The second (sharing their existing QA check logic) is not something they’ll be able to do.

Next steps here:

Approving and cleaning existing strings on Crowdin

In this tutorial I’ll cover how to approve existing strings in Crowdin. This thread is a follow-up to https://forums.classicpress.net/t/poeditor-vs-glotpress/2089 and today’s i18n meeting in Slack. The goal of this process is to get all of our existing translations marked as “Approved”, and at the same time, take advantage of Crowdin’s error checking to make some improvements to the translations. It’s a good idea to do this process before opening each language to community contributions, since…