Re: PO-based Documentation Translation (wa Re: Weekly i18n statusupdate)

[Alexander Kirillov <kirillov math sunysb edu>]

This has been discussed - and no consensus was reached. I personally do
not feel that PO format is suitable for docs. PO files deal with a
collection of clearly defined units (messages), with no relation between
them. Docs do not look like that, and I do not know how to present a
document as a series of such units. For example, taking each paragraph
as a "message" can sometimes cause trouble: in my translating
experience, I sometimes felt the need to break a paragraph in two, so
there is no 1-1 correspondence between paragraphs of original doc and
paragraphs of translation. There are other issues, too. So I found that
updating translations using good old diff mode of emacs was easier. 

This, of course, is a matter of choice: if most translators feel that PO
format is what they need, we should start thinking about moving to it.
But I see many problems with this, and not enough benefits. 

Best,
Sasha




 
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 16:53, Christian Rose wrote:
> tor 2003-09-25 klockan 16.15 skrev Reinout van Schouwen:
> > W.r.t. the i18n status. I think it's about time that the help
> > files/documentation are also counted in the translation statistics. For
> > many languages, the desktop is now 100% translated, which is great, but
> > now we have to raise the bar and translate all the docs as well!
> 
> I agree, but I think that if we start using PO format for docs
> translations, integrating the docs translation statistics into the
> ordinary translation status pages will be trivial.
> 
> So I see the problem as a consequence of us not having moved to PO based
> docs translation yet. Someone needs to sort that out first so we can
> start using PO-based docs translation on a large scale across GNOME.
> 
> 
> Christian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-doc-list mailing list
> gnome-doc-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list