More and more websites use some automated translation into what they think is my language of choice, be that by relying on a browser setting (for which I'm looking for a fix) or worse by geolocation. Even worse, these (usually automated) translations are often both terrible and cannot be switched off. This is even more terrible when only a sites framework is auto-translated while (fortunately!) the actual content stays in the original language, since a mixup of languages is not exactly comfortable.
So, is this very bad design or am I missing a very sophisticated thought here?
Answer
TL;DR "yes".
This is a problem that touches on best practices for localization (commonly "L10n") and internationalization ("i18n").
The problem you've highlighted does seem rather common with CMS framework implementations that come with interface language packs.
From my own development experience, the rationale of community managers (like those at NASA for the site you linked) often goes something like this:
- Let's use a CMS framework to make development and maintenance easier.
- Cool, it also comes with "translations".
- Let's enable them to capture and please as many people as possible.
Unwittingly, this results in a terrible user experience: unpredictable, partly-translated content that ends up showing a lack of understanding of the needs of international users.
On a site like UX.se, though, this is preaching to the choir.
Mind you, there are some cultures in which mixed-language content is expected like South Korea (and many Asian countries): 
Basically, don't break the user's expectations.
No comments:
Post a Comment