From: Eero T. <ee...@us...> - 2006-04-19 16:11:06
|
Hi, The "check_po" script for translations is really nice. I was wondering whether it should/could check also that translator is not including the context part into translation (part before '|'). As the context part is removed, translating also that is not in any way serious, but the translator might have not understood the purpose of the context. Maybe the script could output something like: redundant context part left into message 'X' ? Is there something else that could be checked automatically from the translations that's not yet being checked? It might e.g. check & warn about the same thing that msgformat already does i.e. that the msgstr ends with the same punctuation as msgid. - Eero |
From: Alex R. <sh...@gr...> - 2006-04-19 16:17:45
|
Eero, On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 19:27 +0300, Eero Tamminen wrote: > I was wondering whether it should/could check also that translator is not > including the context part into translation (part before '|'). As the > context part is removed, translating also that is not in any way serious, Actually, translating the context is very serious. The "|" is only removed *if* the msgid and msgstr are the same thing (e.g. no translation). If they are not the same thing then the msgstr will be outputed as is. So the translated strings will not have "|" removed! > but the translator might have not understood the purpose of the context. > Maybe the script could output something like: > redundant context part left into message 'X' > ? This sounds like a good idea. If this is detected, anybody can go ahead and remove the "blah|" part without necessarily knowing the language. Alex --=20 Alexander Roitman http://www.gramps-project.org |
From: Eero T. <ee...@us...> - 2006-04-19 21:05:41
|
Hi, On Wednesday 19 April 2006 19:17, Alex Roitman wrote: > Actually, translating the context is very serious. The "|" is only > removed *if* the msgid and msgstr are the same thing (e.g. no > translation). If they are not the same thing then the msgstr will > be outputed as is. > > So the translated strings will not have "|" removed! > > > but the translator might have not understood the purpose of the > > context. Maybe the script could output something like: > > redundant context part left into message 'X' > > ? > > This sounds like a good idea. If this is detected, anybody > can go ahead and remove the "blah|" part without necessarily > knowing the language. I think in this case it would be better to leave that to the translator on the assumption that as he didn't know the purpose of the context, the rest of the string might not be correctly translated either. - Eero |
From: Stefan <sk...@ac...> - 2006-04-21 05:40:54
|
Hi, > I was wondering whether it should/could check also that translator is n= ot > including the context part into translation (part before '|'). As the > context part is removed, translating also that is not in any way seriou= s, > but the translator might have not understood the purpose of the context= . This was new to me. I didn't know what context parts was until now, and I realize that I have screwed up the swedish translation. I will fix that, and I also think that the check_po script should check for this. Not all translators are well aware of how .po-files really work. At least, I'm not. Stefan --=20 Stefan Bj=F6rk, student http://www.acc.umu.se/~skalman/ Ume=E5 Universitet +46-70-6222437 |
From: Alex R. <sh...@gr...> - 2006-04-21 15:48:04
|
Stefan, On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 07:40 +0200, Stefan Bj=C3=B6rk wrote: > > I was wondering whether it should/could check also that translator is n= ot > > including the context part into translation (part before '|'). As the > > context part is removed, translating also that is not in any way seriou= s, > > but the translator might have not understood the purpose of the context= . >=20 > This was new to me. I didn't know what context parts was until now, > and I realize that I have screwed up the swedish translation. I will > fix that, and I also think that the check_po script should check for > this. >=20 > Not all translators are well aware of how .po-files really work. At > least, I'm not. For now, I have added this to our wiki page on translations: http://developers.gramps-project.org/tiki-index.php?page=3DTipsForTransl= ators I'll see about tweaking check_po script, Alex --=20 Alexander Roitman http://www.gramps-project.org |
From: Alex R. <sh...@gr...> - 2006-04-22 00:30:54
|
On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 19:27 +0300, Eero Tamminen wrote: > I was wondering whether it should/could check also that translator is not > including the context part into translation (part before '|'). As the > context part is removed, translating also that is not in any way serious, > but the translator might have not understood the purpose of the context. >=20 > Maybe the script could output something like: > redundant context part left into message 'X' This and other enhancements for check_po have been added to the CVS: 1. Fuzzy translations are excluded from all tests. A lot of false positives were produced by fuzzies that are not seen by the user. 2. Runaway context is being check and reported. The criterion for this test is as follows (all must be true): msgid has '|' char msgstr has '|' char, msgdir differs from msgstr. 3. The total and coverage stats are produced for PO file *and* for the template.po file. This is to detect the need for updating po-files from the template. For up-to-date po file the PO total and Template total will be the same. Please feel free to run "./check_po filename.po" and correct your translation. I'll try emailing the remaining problems to translators after the weekend, if any still exist. Alex --=20 Alexander Roitman http://www.gramps-project.org |
From: Eero T. <ee...@us...> - 2006-04-22 12:14:20
Attachments:
check_po.diff
|
Hi, On Saturday 22 April 2006 03:30, Alex Roitman wrote: > > I was wondering whether it should/could check also that translator is > > not including the context part into translation (part before '|'). As > > the context part is removed, translating also that is not in any way > > serious, but the translator might have not understood the purpose of > > the context. > > > > Maybe the script could output something like: > > redundant context part left into message 'X' > > This and other enhancements for check_po have been added to the CVS: > > 1. Fuzzy translations are excluded from all tests. A lot of false > positives were produced by fuzzies that are not seen by the user. > > 2. Runaway context is being check and reported. The criterion for this > test is as follows (all must be true): > msgid has '|' char > msgstr has '|' char, > msgdir differs from msgstr. Great, thanks! > 3. The total and coverage stats are produced for PO file *and* > for the template.po file. This is to detect the need for updating > po-files from the template. For up-to-date po file the PO total > and Template total will be the same. I think fuzzies should still be included into the PO total. Currently the code seems to give wrong impression that the po hasn't been merged although it's only untranslated. Attached is a patch to add fuzzy counting. > Please feel free to run "./check_po filename.po" and correct your > translation. I'll try emailing the remaining problems to translators > after the weekend, if any still exist. There seem to be a couple of (not very important) problems in the new script: - If I give check_po multiple PO files, I get following error: ---------- ./check_po fi.po ru.po ... Traceback (most recent call last): File "./check_po", line 193, in ? print "%s \t%5d \t%7d \t%7d \t%7d \t%7d \t%7d \t%3.2f%% \t%3.2f%%" %\ KeyError: 'fi.po' ---------- - For some reason check_po seems to count fi.po and sv.po messages wrong: ----------- <~/work/gramps-devel/src/po> grep msgid template.po|wc 2655 17044 118368 <~/work/gramps-devel/src/po> grep msgid fi.po|wc 2655 17782 124247 <~/work/gramps-devel/src/po> grep msgstr fi.po|wc 2655 13685 134862 <~/work/gramps-devel/src/po> grep msgstr template.po|wc 2655 5310 26550 src/po> ./check_po fi.po File: fi.po Template total: 2655 PO total: 2654 ----------- I first thought it was because of the fuzzies, but there are no fuzzies and merging the template.pot again to fi.po doesn't change it at all. - Eero |
From: Alex R. <sh...@gr...> - 2006-04-22 18:34:45
|
Eero, On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 15:31 +0300, Eero Tamminen wrote: > I think fuzzies should still be included into the PO total. Currently th= e > code seems to give wrong impression that the po hasn't been merged althou= gh > it's only untranslated. Attached is a patch to add fuzzy counting. Applied and committed, thanks! > > Please feel free to run "./check_po filename.po" and correct your > > translation. I'll try emailing the remaining problems to translators > > after the weekend, if any still exist. >=20 > There seem to be a couple of (not very important) problems in the new > script: > - If I give check_po multiple PO files, I get following error: > ---------- > ./check_po fi.po ru.po > ... > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "./check_po", line 193, in ? > print "%s \t%5d \t%7d \t%7d \t%7d \t%7d \t%7d \t%3.2f%% \t%3.2f%%" %\ > KeyError: 'fi.po' Fixed in the CVS. > ---------- > - For some reason check_po seems to count fi.po and sv.po messages wrong: > ----------- > <~/work/gramps-devel/src/po> grep msgid template.po|wc > 2655 17044 118368 > <~/work/gramps-devel/src/po> grep msgid fi.po|wc > 2655 17782 124247 > <~/work/gramps-devel/src/po> grep msgstr fi.po|wc > 2655 13685 134862 > <~/work/gramps-devel/src/po> grep msgstr template.po|wc > 2655 5310 26550 > src/po> ./check_po fi.po > File: fi.po > Template total: 2655 > PO total: 2654 > ----------- > I first thought it was because of the fuzzies, but there are no fuzzies > and merging the template.pot again to fi.po doesn't change it at all. This I haven't found the explanation for :-), at least not yet. Alex --=20 Alexander Roitman http://www.gramps-project.org |