Re: PO-based Documentation Translation

fre 2003-09-26 klockan 01.01 skrev Stephen Holmes:
> I'd have to agree.  Formats such as TMX are far better suited to the
> content for documenation and online help.

For all intents and purposes, PO format is what we already use, and
using PO format also for the docs translations would allow us to
seemelessly integrate it into our existing translation infrastructure
and translation process.

Based on my own experience, I don't see the differences big enough (if
they exist at all) to warrant an entirely seperate translation
infrastructure and translation process.

> The PO format is suited to
> software message strings and UI element strings.  The problem with
> documentation is in leveraging from one version to the next.  One
> normally uses sentence-based or paragraph-based leveraging and that
> would pose difficulties (I would imagine) in the PO format.
> That said, if anyone has any PO-Doc, I'd love to see it to see how it
> works.

Works fine with the Red Hat Anaconda (the RH installer) online help. You
can have a look at it in action at . They use
some perl script to do this though.

In GNOME we have "doc-i18n-tool", which is an XML-aware C application,
in the "intltool" CVS module. It hasn't gotten any serious testing
though, probably because it seems it doesn't get built with and
distributed with intltool.


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