Re: [sup-talk] i18n?

From: Tero Tilus <tero@tilus.net>
To: sup-talk <sup-talk@rubyforge.org>
Subject: Re: [sup-talk] i18n?
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:58:09 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1257169884-sup-2615@tilus.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1257163780-sup-1357@masanjin.net>

William Morgan, 2009-11-02 14:12:
> Reformatted excerpts from Fabio Riga's message of 2009-10-23:
>> Well, I finally read the code and I agree with Tero. I also think that
>> the use of gettext will be simpler for both developer and translator.
> 
> Tero's comment wasn't about gettext, as far as I understand it.

You had me right.  I was talking about the approach to i18n in general.

> There are Ruby gettext bindings but they look like a pain in the ass
> to use, and it's pretty trivial to replace it a language like Ruby.

Also they are pretty trivial to wrap behind nice interface in a
language like Ruby.  "Been there, done that!".t  :)

>> Can anyone explain me where and why a translated string in the UI
>> should be searchable with a regular expression?
>
> I believe he was thinking about something like git grep. You see a
> weird message displayed by Sup, you want to find the code that's
> generating it, you can git grep the source for the message directly.

That was exactly what I was thinking.

Having weird keys in code imo also slows down development.  If I want
to (write code to) display a simple message to user, with "original
language as key" approac i just write "my message".t (or whatever the
l10n interface is) instead of modifying some yaml file somewhere and
then copy-pasting the key from there to code. I just plain code and
let somebody else figure out the translation later or.

-- 
Tero Tilus ## 050 3635 235 ## http://tero.tilus.net/
_______________________________________________
sup-talk mailing list
sup-talk@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk