[LSC] Internationalisation (I18N) of the part library

[Travis Cobbs]

So, LSC members, does anyone else have an opinion?  As I said, I don't mind
using .pot and .po format they're easy for a program to parse.  Having good
tools to create them isn't all that useful if they're a royal pain to parse
without using the GNU gettext library.

--Travis

On 10/7/06, Orion Pobursky <orion at ldraw.org> wrote:
>
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> LSC mailing list
> LSC at ldraw.org
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/lsc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://five.pairlist.net/pipermail/lsc/attachments/20061008/3fd33e78/attachment.htm