Re: [evolution-patches] bug fix for 41843, csv exporting file should have consistent english field name

[Chris Toshok <toshok ximian com>]

This looks good, I'll commit it today.

Chris

On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 00:25, Gilbert Fang wrote:
> Hi, Toshok
>  Oh,  well. 
> The main reason is I am afraid the staroffice group may take long time
> for changing the field name. But they just told me they can accept such
> changes. 
> 
> Now the patch is following your suggestion. 
> Could you please review and check it quickly? so that I can tell the
> staroffice group the new field mapping ASAP. They are nearly code
> freezing. :-(
> 
> Gilbert 
>  
> 
> On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 14:50, Chris Toshok wrote:
> > Why not just change the use e_card_simple_get_name to
> > e_card_simple_get_ecard_field?  It offers a unique "name" for each field
> > that isn't localized.
> > 
> > It's not as pretty as the names you included here but it's just meant
> > for consumption by tools anyway.
> > 
> > Chris
> > 
> > On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 20:51, Gilbert Fang wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 09:26, Chris Toshok wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 04:52, Gilbert Fang wrote:
> > > > > Hi, toshok
> > > > >  Please review it . 
> > > > > patch41843_20030424:  e_card_simple_get_name should return a
> > > > > non-localized name
> > > > 
> > > > This is not true - it must return a localized name because it's used
> > > > elsewhere in the UI (specifically in the minicard view.  it's used to
> > > > create the minicard field names.)
> > > > 
> > > > use e_card_simple_get_ecard_field instead.  unfortunately that'll return
> > > > strings that will be different than what you're checking against now.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > > 
> > > Maybe my previous patch is not right.But this is really a trouble for
> > > data exchanging  with staroffice. 
> > > 
> > > I wrote  a new patch, which  only puts all the csv field names in the
> > > export's code. Thus it will not affect evolution's other part,
> > > I think  csv field name needs its own field name rationally, because
> > > it has the difference in semantics with the e-card-simple-field. 
> > > 
> > > Could you please review it ?
> > > 
> > > Gilbert 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >