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

[Petr Kovar <pmkovar gnome org>]

"Christian Rose" <menthos gnome org>, Tue, 5 Aug 2008 18:23:56 +0200:

> On 8/5/08, Petr Kovar <pmkovar gnome org> wrote:

(...)

> > 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

That "relatively" is very relative though...

> 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). 

And if my entire team uses Poedit, and we share e.g. the translation
memory files, and/or our team documentation suggests to use Poedit, provides
the ways and steps of translating GNOME using Poedit, etc., then the switch
to another editor will have measurable impact on the workflow, that's for
sure.

> Fortunately this is just a hypothetical discussion as all
> wellknown toolkits, including translate toolkit, now support msgctxt.

Unfortunately, the Poedit case is not hypothetical...
 
> >  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,

I wish that too. If only they could help - you know, not everybody's a coder
here...

> instead of demanding that the rest of the translation world continue

Not quite the "rest of the translation world", but only few GNOME modules,
as listed on the live.gnome.org page.

> 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!

But there's a big chance. Poedit's developer is actively working on the
project.

> On the other hand, if Poedit is lacking a critical feature that
> several translation projects need and require, 

GNOME modules started to need it just recently...

> 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.

Very true, very true. If only they were coders... but maybe they actually
are, we'll see.

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

And I find it very hard to see why you are putting words in people's
mouths? Or who said that the situation will improve automatically? I didn't.

Also, you didn't answer my question regarding people who believe
that Poedit is still providing them with appropriate translation context
during the l10n... Nobody cares about their lack of information?

Sorry for prolonging the discussion, but let me say, I don't like your tone
much.

Best,
Petr Kovar