On 8/5/08, Petr Kovar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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. Christian _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
