Re: Regarding LSR translation work

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Regarding LSR translation work

Francisco Vila
2012/5/4 Phil Holmes <[hidden email]>:
> I think the way to do this would be to have makelsr.py extract the texidoc
> and doctitle strings from the snippets and to put them into
> Documentation/texidoc/.  In principle it would delete them from the snippet,
> and then put them back in again, as I believe it does for translated
> strings.  However, that seems pointless - if it just copies the strings to
> the directory, the translators can monitor those, as they do for other
> documents.
>
> Is that accurate?

Our problem is not just what to track and how, but the fact that
English and translated strings are mixed in the same files, any change
to those generates warnings for translators making them to think there
is any translation work to do, and if they do it, that in turn makes
changes to the same files generating the warnings again for the rest
of translators.

Your solution above seems to go in the good direction as long as

  - what we track are English-only strings
  - makelsr copies those strings to another place but does not change
them in place.
  - check-translation generates output based on changes to original
English files, not on the result of makelsr as it currently does.

I think that's all, forwarding to translations list for more opinions.
--
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Regarding LSR translation work

Jean-Charles MALAHIEUDE
Le 04/05/2012 17:34, Francisco Vila disait :

> 2012/5/4 Phil Holmes<[hidden email]>:
>> I think the way to do this would be to have makelsr.py extract the texidoc
>> and doctitle strings from the snippets and to put them into
>> Documentation/texidoc/.  In principle it would delete them from the snippet,
>> and then put them back in again, as I believe it does for translated
>> strings.  However, that seems pointless - if it just copies the strings to
>> the directory, the translators can monitor those, as they do for other
>> documents.
>>
>> Is that accurate?
>
> Our problem is not just what to track and how, but the fact that
> English and translated strings are mixed in the same files, any change
> to those generates warnings for translators making them to think there
> is any translation work to do, and if they do it, that in turn makes
> changes to the same files generating the warnings again for the rest
> of translators.
>
> Your solution above seems to go in the good direction as long as
>
>    - what we track are English-only strings
>    - makelsr copies those strings to another place but does not change
> them in place.
>    - check-translation generates output based on changes to original
> English files, not on the result of makelsr as it currently does.
>
> I think that's all, forwarding to translations list for more opinions.

As this may be the only best way to just track the "headers", I totally
agree.  And, on a second thought, all languages would then adopt in some
way the same tree and reflect the same "contents", which in my opinion
is not a bad thing.

Cheers,
Jean-Charles


Loading...