[LSC] Internationalisation (I18N) of the part library

[Orion Pobursky]

Travis Cobbs wrote:
> I think using GNU gettext format for the translations might be a really bad
> idea.  First of all, most ldraw tools don't run in *nix, so just using it
> might be a pain.  Secondly, gettext is GPL, and not LGPL, which means it 
> can
> only be used by GPL-licensed tools.

Yes, that may be an issue.

> I haven't looked at the format of .pot and .po files, so it could be that
> they're easy for anyone to parse on their own.  If this is the case, 
> then we
> can consider using the format anyway.  But it seems odd to use a file 
> format
> designed to be used by a library that most ldraw software won't be using.

I recently implentmented GNU gettext in LDDP and found it very easy to 
use.  As far as the .po files, there's a program call poedit that takes 
the legwork out of editing the .po files.

> Note: my program, LDView, is already licensed under GPL.  (The QT version
> has to be, since it uses QT GPL.)  But I know that there are a bunch of
> ldraw tools that aren't GPL (MLCad is probably at the top of the list).
> 
> --Travis
> 
> On 10/4/06, William Howard <william at howard-family.fsworld.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> There are also some past messages in the archive starting here
>> http://five.pairlist.net/pipermail/lsc/2005-April/000339.html
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: lsc-bounces at ldraw.org [mailto:lsc-bounces at ldraw.org] On Behalf Of
>> William Howard
>> Sent: 30 September 2006 10:50
>> To: 'LDraw Standards Committee'
>> Subject: [LSC] Internationalisation (I18N) of the part library
>>
>>
>> >From the laundry list
>>
>> > 2.) Internationalisation (I18N) of the part library
>> > http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/org/ldraw/?n=3470
>> > http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=10420
>> > http://five.pairlist.net/pipermail/lsc/2005-March/000335.html
>> > http://five.pairlist.net/pipermail/lsc/2005-April/000339.html
>>
>> Before even contemplating HOW we are going to I18N the library I think we
>> need to decide
>>
>> a) WHAT is going to be covered by I18N
>> b) what KEY we are going to use
>>
>>
>> My thoughts on a) are
>>   i) part name/description
>> ii) category
>> iii) keywords
>>
>> Everything else in the header should be Australian English, while 
>> comments
>> within the file can be any language.
>>
>>
>> While b) is somewhat harder to decided.  Both the part number and part
>> description/name are candidates.  Both can change.  Both do change.  Both
>> have issues.  As a programmer the uniqueness of the part number is
>> appealing.  As files are stored on disk, there can never be two parts 
>> with
>> the same number, but there can (and have - the boat stud for example) 
>> been
>> two parts with the same name.


-Orion

-- 
We don't stop playing because we grow old;
we grow old because we stop playing
-George Bernard Shaw