2010/8/19 helix84
<helix84@...150...>
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:13, Lucas Vieites <
lucas@...162...> wrote:
> just to clarify my position: I don't pretend to substitute the currently
> used gettext .po files that are used for the GUI, but only the Wiki pages
using Translatewiki, you want to translate Inkscape website wiki pages
using Translatewiki. I don't think that's reasonable - Translate wiki
is string-based, not page-based, so it will not make this job easier.
I originally understood you want to enable current .po files to be
translated via Translatewiki (as Yuri said, they do .po
import/export), that would be reasonable.
I that case you are right, this tool does not fit my/our needs for documentation translation.
> In the same way that I don't agree
> with the decision that was taken to convert the tutorials to .po files for
> translation, and then converting them back again to svg format, I would not
> find it "logical" to convert the wiki texts to .po and then back again. I
> think that that would be a waste of effort if there already is an easier way
> to automate the task.
Here I don't agree with you - the task is automated. And import/export
of translations to some web translation platform would also be
automated, .po files wouldn't disappear, only translators would not
work with them directly.
I understand your point of view, but still, I would like to have an easy way to translate wiki pages without having to check for changes manually.
Any ideas?
> I don't have any experience using translatewiki (yet), so I don't know if
> it really would be an easier way to keep inkscape's wiki translations up to
> date. Could you shed some light here?
I think this is highly subjective - which one each translator prefers.
Recently there was such transition going on in LXDE and they were
deciding between Transifex and Pootle (Translatewiki was probably also
mentioned) and every translator had his say in that. You can look it
up in the archives.
But like I said, this is not for wiki pages.
Regards,
~~helix84