# Proof-read functionality enabled in Transifex. On purpose?

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/proof-read-functionality-enabled-in-transifex-on-purpose/86279>\
**Category:** Translations\
**Created:** [April 27, 2018, 5:49am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/proof-read-functionality-enabled-in-transifex-on-purpose/86279 "2018-04-27T05:49:19Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Benjol](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/benjol/32/3907_2.png) [@Benjol](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Benjol)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2018, 5:49am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/proof-read-functionality-enabled-in-transifex-on-purpose/86279/1 "2018-04-27T05:49:20Z")

</div>

I’ve noticed today that Transifex has an ‘proofread’ step added to the translate-\>review process.

Is this deliberate? Because currently for French, I do most of the reviewing of my own translations, so this won’t be adding more eye-balls, just more donkey work.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gerhard](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/gerhard/32/119479_2.png) [@gerhard](https://meta.discourse.org/u/gerhard)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2018, 9:04am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/proof-read-functionality-enabled-in-transifex-on-purpose/86279/2 "2018-04-27T09:04:52Z")

</div>

Yes, I enabled it on purpose. I think it can be a useful feature that allows a second pair of eyes. **You don’t have to use it, if you don’t need it.** We don’t care about the proofread state when we pull translations from Transifex. Heck, we currently do not even filter by review state.

You and your team of translators has multiple options:

- Ignore the proofread feature. No harm done.
- Let someone else, who hasn’t reviewed the string, proofread and use it to find errors in translations.
- Or use Transifex’s bulk select feature and mark all of your reviewed strings proofread as well. That’s really helpful when you don’t like empty checkboxes and percentages \< 100%. 😉

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Benjol](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/benjol/32/3907_2.png) [@Benjol](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Benjol)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2018, 9:39am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/proof-read-functionality-enabled-in-transifex-on-purpose/86279/3 "2018-04-27T09:39:55Z")

</div>

But is it a second pair of eyes or a third pair of eyes?

I mean, if we’ve already given translators review rights because we don’t have enough reviewers, is there any point adding proof-reading to that AND giving translator/reviewers proof-reading rights?

Seems a bit weird to me.