[LSC] Internationalisation (I18N) of the part library

[William Howard]

I need to read up on the gettext library.
 
I doubt I'll ever write a major LDraw program, so don't think I'll have much
to say on implementation (although I *do* deal with I18N issues in my line
of work)
 
How about opening the implementation discussion up to the programmers by
posting on Lugnet?
 
W

-----Original Message-----
From: lsc-bounces at ldraw.org [mailto:lsc-bounces at ldraw.org] On Behalf Of
Travis Cobbs
Sent: 08 October 2006 23:11
To: LDraw Standards Committee
Subject: Re: [LSC] Internationalisation (I18N) of the part library


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
<mailto: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
<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-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/20061008/772df087/attachment.html