[WIP] Add a Localization section to the guide

[rolfedh]

Fixes: Add a Localization section to the guide #417

The localization team has specific recommendations to improve content for both non-English readers and Red Hat associates performing localization.

cc: @aireilly @rohennes [email protected]

[Srivaralakshmi]

@rolfedh any further updates on this PR? Will a discussion with @redhat-documentation/ccs-style-council help to get further inputs or brainstorm about specific recommendations to improve content for both non-English readers and Red Hat associates performing localization?

[bburt-rh]

@rolfedh - Any update on this PR? Thank you!

[rolfedh]

Hi @bburt-rh,

I'm currently in discussions with Chandralekha Balachandran and Chloe Guttman regarding the optimization of the VaRH rules for localization. We're considering an update to the localization section in the SSG. To accommodate their contributions, it might be beneficial to merge this PR as a placeholder for their upcoming work. What are your thoughts?

[bergerhoffer]

@rolfedh I'd rather see a section fleshed out more significantly before merging it in.

In the past, people who have wanted to collaborate on a significant new section have worked on the content in a Google doc first. And then when they are happy with the content, someone opens a PR to add it to the SSG. I'd recommend doing something similar to that for this as well.

[bburt-rh]

@rolfedh - I agree with @bergerhoffer. I'd like to see a PR with more fleshed out content. Adding placeholder content might be confusing because users might think that this is the extent of our guidance about this subject.

[rolfedh]

No problem. That makes sense. I'll close this PR for now.
Perhaps Lekha and Chloe might reuse its content for their work later.
Could we add them both as contributors to the supplementary-style-guide project?
Doing so would facilitate communication with them in issues and PRs.

[bergerhoffer]

@rolfedh I'm not sure how to add them as contributors without giving them merge rights here. I'd prefer to keep our list of mergers pretty tight to those who know our rules on merging, etc.