Re: 2.26 will use GTK+ 2.16

["Kenneth Nielsen" <k nielsen81 gmail com>]

2009/1/5 Christian Rose <menthos gnome org>:
> On 1/4/09, Kenneth Nielsen <k nielsen81 gmail com> wrote:
> [...]
>>  >>  >>  The GTK+ team decided for a short 2.16 cycle, so it can already be
>>  >>  >>  used for GNOME 2.26; this is great news and something many developers
>>  >>  >>  wanted, as there are already interesting features:
>>  > [...]
>>  >>  also the ability to parse pango attributes on GtkLabel directly (allowing
>>  >>  translatable strings without markup to have fancy pango sugar).
>>  >
>>  > Wohoo! This has been one of the most annoying issues for translators
>>  > for many years. And now we have a solution in sight, perhaps even for
>>  > GNOME 2.26! No more wasting time and resources on "translating"
>>  > markup... I'm starting to feel sentimental, and my eyes are almost
>>  > getting wet... A tremendously big thanks to everyone involved!
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >>  Nice, I'm going to do my best to pump out some nice editing magic
>>  >>  for the new GtkEntry features from Glade, and I'll see if I cant squeeze in
>>  >>  some pango attribute support on other widgets than just label
>>  >>  (I guess we can set attributes on entries too... not sure what else...)
>>  >
>>  > That would be awesome...!
>>
>>
>> This is indeed great. I don't quite get what he is talking about with
>>  the "editing magic", so I don't know if it is the same thing I asking,
>>  but I was wondering if it would in any way be possible, to make some
>>  scripting magic, if some project drops the markup but still has the
>>  same strings, so we don't have to update those manually?
>
> Let's worry about our existing translations later, and do one step at a time.
>
> The first step, if and when the feature he is discussing would be
> implemented, would be for us to start filing bugs against modules that
> include glade markup, so that they actually start using those features
> instead of including markup. Only after we would have convinced them
> would we need to start worrying about removing the markup from our
> translations as well...
>

OK. Right you are.