Re: Improve translations in Mallard

On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 00:18 +0200, Chusslove Illich wrote:
> > [: Shaun McCance :]
> > We've been slowly transitioning our documents to itstool.
> > [...]
> > You see this:
> >
> > #: C/
> While intltool does this too, it shouldn't be done. PO processing tools, be
> it PO editors or whatever else, have no obligation to consider and parse
> such comments.

Are there any processing tools that actually have a problem with this?

>  A source reference comment, according to de-facto PO format
> reference (Gettext manual), should contain only file names and line numbers,
> i.e. #: file1:lno1 file2:lno2 .... Anything else should go into extracted
> comments. For example:
>   #: C/
>   #. tag-path: title/gui

The problem I see with that is that the tag path is no longer tied to
the file that defined it. That's fine when strings only appear once,
but how about this:

#: C/
#: C/
#. tag-path: title/gui
#. tag-path: td/p

Which is which? Maybe it doesn't matter that much. I don't know. I'm
not a translator. I'm just trying to make things easier.

On the other hand, putting the path on its own line would make longer
paths less painful, so we could perhaps do a full path, or a path up
to the closest sectioning element. That might be helpful.

On the other other hand, gettext defines and treats PO files in a way
that's not really nice to third-party tools. I'd love to put some info
in #, comments (e.g. marking a message transliteration-only), but the
fact that it's a controlled vocabulary prevents me. I'd rather not put
more and more stuff in #. comments, because it's going to get in the
way of actual comments to translators at some point.

Open to discussion on all this. These tool are there to make your jobs


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