SuttaCentral
Great to have you with us. It’s wonderful to see things coming together now.
I am not sure why Bhante Sujato says " it seems like the best way". To me it seems preferable to divide it up as you propose in your second suggestion. I will discuss with the Most Venerable and then get back to you once we have sorted out this problem of monumental importance! 
The reason being that the abbreviated portion consists of multiple segments when fully spelled out. So keeping it in a separate segment allows for the possibility of integrating with another Pali text that in fact has the full text.
Found a typo in Pc 71:
“if he says, “I will fnd out and I will train;” if he is insane; if he is the first offender”
and corrected it: find.
Ok, discussion closed!
Typo in Pc 76:
“Foolish men, how can you groundlessly accused a monk of an offense entailing suspension?”—Fixed.
Pootle doesn’t like me… 
For some reason it won’t show all the work I’ve done in the overview:
All these rules have been done, but three of them just don’t show. If I open the files, the text is there however.
Sorry, I don’t know why this is so. I suspect there may be something malformed in the PO file. However, since it is still there, it should be okay. Let’s keep an eye out and see if it happens again.
Another instance in Pc 80:
“How can that monk get from his seat and leave without giving his consent, when the Order is in the process of deliberating?”
Shouldn’t it be “get up from his seat”?
PC 81:
“Robe-clot)”
Changed it to “Robe-cloth”.
Yes, please keep on correcting. I obviously haven’t proofread this very closely. Your help is much appreciated! 
@blake is aware this is an issue. It seems there is an issue with the updating of the stats. But don’t worry, once you submit something it is stored in there. At least to me it has been working that way! 
Done Pc 71–82 (even if file 82 again doesn’t show in the stats). No guarantee that I saw all the typos though… 
Ajahn @Brahmali, you have your files back now!
To continue, what should we do first—add more text or complete the numbering first? I am assigned to do numbering for Patidesaniya, Sekhiya, and Adhikaranasamatha of the Bhikkhu Vibhanga. Will this be done in Pootle, or do we have to download the files and work in a local text editor as before? And if the former, does that Perl script also work in Pootle? And how???
Lots of questions…
And Ajahn Brahmali, in case you want us to continue entering the translation first, please don’t send new text files to me before Wednesday. Then you can give them to me in packages of 5.
Wonderful! I am glad things are happening so quickly, once you get onto it. I’m impressed with yours and Tara’s grasp of Pali. You must obviously know a fair bit to do this segmenting properly.
I don’t even know what you mean by numbering. I suspect this is @sujato’s department. Still, I think it would be useful to complete the pācittyas first before we go on to the next stage. It usually makes things simpler when one thing is out of mind, and you can focus fully on the next one. But only if Bhante Sujato is ok with this.
And I’ll send you another five rules on Wednesday, as requested.
So, keep up the good work!
It’s adding the correct pts-cs numbers to the Pali text. It’s been done so far for the Khandhakas and the Bhikkhu-Vb until the Pacittiyas. Tara and I have divided the work so that I will continue with the remaining rules of the Bhikkhu-Vb, and she will do the Bhikkhuni-Vb.
Please send Pc 83–87; 61–70 is Tara’s department. 
As for me, I know nothing of the grammar, but am getting some feeling for the structure of the language by reading it while doing this work. When this Vinaya project is finished, the next thing on my to-do list is to go through your Pali course which is available on Wisdom & Wonders.
The task before us is to add the text. So we continue to work as we have been. I do not think there is any need to add numbers: they are already in Brahmali’s translation. For that reason I have changed the process to make it as streamlined as possible and avoid duplicating work:
So for now, just make sure all the text and markup is there in Pootle, exactly as you have been doing. 
Any proofreading corrections that you notice are most appreciated, but also remember that there will be additional proofing later.
Thank you, Bhante, I hadn’t realized that your magic tricks mean that we don’t need to continue the numbering by hand—which is of course very cool! 
It will be cool if it works! 
Sorry, one thing I forgot to mention when I relied to this originally: markdown will only be used inside segments, so it doesn’t apply to any structural elements like headings and so on.
Ultimately we would like to use a system called “standoff properties” that would allow us to completely extract all markup from segments, but for now that is not possible. However, as with the current HTML, such markdown appears only infrequently, and should be readily strippable. So far, it looks like it will only be a very small subset of markdown used in this way. You can see the current state of the proposal here; for the translations, only the “Basics” will be relevant.
After working on these Vinaya texts for a while I have a question regarding Ajahn @Brahmali’s translation. Not that I am a Pali expert in any way, nor an expert of the Vinaya—just learning.
But this is the point I am wondering about:
There is a discussion going on as to how a “dukkata” should be considered. Some call it “dukkata offense” and count this as an extra class of offenses, and others say calling it “offense” just adds to the inflation of the number of offenses in the Vinaya, and the actual meaning is simply “wrong conduct”.
Now here the Pali term “āpatti dukkaṭassa” is rendered as “he commits an offense of wrong conduct”.
What is your stance on this, Ajahn Brahmali—should dukkata “offenses” be counted as a class of offenses, or how do you see this?
If not, could it not instead of “he commits an offense of wrong conduct” simply be “this is wrong conduct”, or “this is wrong conduct of him” (or maybe you can phrase it into better English)?
I should not forget to mention how much I enjoy reading your translation here while working on it!
I think it is important to distinguish between translation and a critical evaluation of the text. When the text says āpatti dukkaṭassa there is really no choice but to render it as “an offence of wrong conduct”. If you leave out “offence”, you are not translating āpatti. When, however, the text just reads dukkata, which it sometimes does, then the proper translation is simply “wrong conduct”.
When we discuss these texts, however, and we try to understand their evolution - using as broad a range of evidence as possible - that is the time to bring up whether the dukkatas were a class of offences from the very beginning, or whether this is a later development. And I do think there is good evidence to suggest it is a later development. But I try to avoid this impacting my translation. There is always a struggle to remain as impartial as possible and just translate the text as is, a struggle at which you will sometimes fail.
But I am glad to hear you are enjoying it!