[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-i18n-doc
Subject:    Re: Should an application uses framework translations if it is not itself translated?
From:       Aurélien Gâteau <agateau () kde ! org>
Date:       2014-04-25 8:47:41
Message-ID: ljd7fe$dco$1 () ger ! gmane ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Albert Astals Cid wrote:

> El Dijous, 24 d'abril de 2014, a les 22:53:34, Aurélien Gâteau va
> escriure:
>> Albert Astals Cid wrote:
>> > El Dijous, 24 d'abril de 2014, a les 17:01:32, Aurélien Gâteau va
>> > 
>> > escriure:
>> >> Albert Astals Cid wrote:
>> >> > El Dimarts, 22 d'abril de 2014, a les 17:06:11, Aurélien Gâteau va
>> >> > 
>> >> > escriure:
>> >> >> While working on KI18n-translated frameworks, I discovered KI18n
>> >> >> does not translate any string if the application itself is not
>> >> >> translated. This
>> >> > 
>> >> > Correct.
>> >> > 
>> >> >> means
>> >> >> if application A uses, say, KIconThemes and does not have any
>> >> >> translation available in the user language (but KIconThemes does),
>> >> >> then any dialog or window coming from KIconThemes won't be
>> >> >> translated.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> It feels wrong to me, especially since if A uses any Qt-translated
>> >> >> framework, strings from the Qt-translated framework will be
>> >> >> translated.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Those are quite small in most of our applications.
>> >> 
>> >> Mmm, what do you mean with "those are quite small"?
>> > 
>> > Which strings from Qt do we use? Not many, maybe the print dialog, and
>> > i'd say that's it, no? Well i guess more nowadays we're killing
>> > KMessageBox and KDialog too.
>> 
>> Oh, I was not talking about strings from Qt, but strings from frameworks
>> which uses the Qt translation system.
> 
> Ah, i see, sorry got confused here.
> 
>> 
>> >> >> I filed a review request to fix this:
>> >> >> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/117688/ but Chusslove says there
>> >> >> are good reasons against supporting partial translations, dating
>> >> >> from before he was involved and this topic should be discussed. Are
>> >> >> those reasons still valid?
>> >> > 
>> >> > Since nothing i can see has changed I'd say they still are.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Namely it gives a translation team the hability to not have a
>> >> > program translated (i.e. having no .po for it) unless they think it
>> >> > has a reasonable amount of quality/quantity/whatever.
>> >> 
>> >> Oh. Where do translators keep their .po files until it is good enough
>> >> then?
>> > 
>> > Wherever they want :D
>> 
>> If it's not in svn, I have to question: does this really happen?
> 
> I have no clue, as Burkhard says probably not very often.

Given this info, do you think it is safe to drop this constraint (and save a 
few file stats on the way)?

Aurélien

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]