Re: msgctxt (was Re: String changes in Evolution)

On 8/5/08, Petr Kovar <pmkovar gnome org> wrote:
>  > There are plenty of tools and if one doesn't do the job there are
>  > plenty of alternatives, including using a bare bones text editor if
>  > necessary.
> Yeah, but using (or suggesting people to use) a plain text editor would be
>  a last resort really.
>  > The more important thing IMHO is the toolkits (glib, gettext,
>  > intltool, pootle, translate toolkit, Damned Lies, Launchpad, etc). All
>  > of these seem fine, however.
> If not, what is the qualitative difference between impossibility of using
>  a gettext catalog editor, and impossibility of using a "toolkit" like pootle
>  or translate toolkit? In both cases, user is forced to make a switch
>  anyway. When doing so, one has to migrate his personal settings including
>  appropriate translation memory files, one has to adapt to the new program's
>  environment, behavior, features, etc. It's just not as simple as saying,
>  "go and change your tool".

What I meant is that there is a big difference if a toolkit doesn't
support a feature, rather than if just one editor doesn't. You can
relatively easily switch editor yourself, and use another editor than
other people, but not so with toolkits, as they have bigger impact on
the workflows of teams (like, for example, if your entire team uses
Pootle). Fortunately this is just a hypothetical discussion as all
wellknown toolkits, including translate toolkit, now support msgctxt.

>  And first and foremost, translators really should be aware of GNOME
>  modules being migrated to msgctxt. For our Czech translators I'll make sure
>  that they get notified in time, but who is going to warn people in the "l10n
>  wild" that Poedit doesn't provide the context information (anymore)?
>  Especially when everything is still just a goal proposal. Another
>  error-prone l10n problem on the horizon? I hope not.
>  (Also note that as far as I know, Poedit is the only GTK+ PO editor with a
>  usable almost bug-free stable/development release for the time being.)

And I just wish that all the people complaining about poedit lacking
msgctxt support would direct that energy into improving said support,
instead of demanding that the rest of the translation world continue
to wait when a much needed and readily available feature, that would
eliminate many common and serious bugs, exists.
There's nothing that says that if we continue to wait, Poedit will
automatically get the needed support. Really!

On the other hand, if Poedit is lacking a critical feature that
several translation projects need and require, and there are people
maybe that are willing to help improve said support in Poedit, they
perhaps might get their act together some day and make Poedit be
usable again for said projects.

I find it very hard to see how the situation will automatically
improve by just waiting.


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