Re: [Evolution] mail i18n issues

Dan Winship wrote:

Are there any standards/proposals/theories on the internationalization
of strings like

        In-Reply-To: Your message of DATE <MSGID>

        On DATE, PERSON wrote:

These should be localized strings.

        This is a multipart message in MIME format.

This probably shouldn't be, since it's not user-visible.  But maybe it
should be, I dunno.  Either way, this one isn't as important.  It's
essentially mailer error text.

Failing a good solution, do people think it is better to write pretty
text in English or write ugly language-neutral text. (Eg,
"In-Reply-To: <MSGID>", and skip the other two entirely.)

Don't mix up headers and body text.  The things you cited above are
meant for humans and are not machine parsable.  The In-Reply-To header
is something else entirely.

I talked a bit about what common formats for the In-Reply-To header are
in <>.

Bottom line is, I think you should only ever emit References, and never
emit In-Reply-To.  Though you should parse them both, and that document
has the world's best algorithm for doing so.

Is it common for mailers in other countries to translate the English
message header names to local forms for display?

I don't know how common it is, but I've seen people who even translate
the string "Re:".  That's really bad, and I believe DRUMS explicitly
makes it an illegal thing to do.

Jamie Zawinski
jwz jwz org   
jwz dnalounge com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]