Re: PO-based Documentation Translation

El mar, 30-09-2003 a las 21:45, Ole Laursen escribió:

>   >
> may be good for your internal translation team, but I wouldn't touch
> it with a firestick. It can't be as good as Emacs for editing text. I
> suspect the VI persons here feel the same. And the ones using gedit.
> And gtranslator. And KBabel. You get the picture. :-)

I think you are confusing a bit some detail. The reference tool here is
not Emacs or our libre software favorite tools. You should study how the
real world works outside. This means you should focuse on Trados,
Wordfast, Transit, Deja Vu and so on, which are the real tools than
professional/commercial translator uses.

Tim's team at Sun did this and reused the translation experience
accumulated in their company for years (I think Sun was too the proposer
of the gettext standard) for adopting XLIFF and developing the new tool.
I'm not against Emacs or the rest, of course. But we need to focus in
the exact target, and I think it's not about using or not PO for docs
instead of which is the best way to solve the document translation
problem, learning how the profession is doing this in the last 10 years.

> I think we should work on making the current editors understand the
> XLIFF format, then later discuss how the software to be translated can
> be switched.

There are publicly available XLIFF->po stylesheets yet. And maybe Sun
could release their filters any time in the future. This will do an easy
interoperation framework for the present and not so bad use of gettext
for programs.

> I wish I had more spare time. Hacking on an XLIFF mode for Emacs
> sounds like a fun project,

Its sound great :-)

        A.Ismael Olea González, la ONG sin futuro.

        El mundo debe empezar a tener miedo a un planeta OLEA

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