From: Colin Marquardt <colin@ma...> - 2007-07-01 17:35:08
is there anyone who objects using xml2po for the tutorial
for the process.
With xml2po, translators would get regular po files to translate,
with all the positive effects (no manual looking for string changes;
more dedicated tools than for Docbook; familiarity of amny
translators with the format; translator credits for free (even
though we don't pull them yet for the About box); strings from
included images are in the same file; the Gnome people are using it;
and probably some more).
I am using xml2po for the German translation since pre-0.45, and it
worked quite well so far. I have started automating the conversion
process to HTML/SVG (to the then intermediate Docbook XML) in SVN.
So if there are no valid objections overriding the plusses, I will
soon start converting all translated Docbook XML files to the po
format. Please submit any translated XML files that are not yet in
I think now is a good time to tackle that process, considering that
0.46 is probably a while but not too far away, and there are quite
some efforts going into tutorials recently (thanks Ryan :).
PS: I'm cmarqu on IRC.
From: Colin Marquardt <colin@ma...> - 2008-02-10 13:35:07
"Xavier Conde Rueda"
> What will happen to those tutorials that doesn't have a PO file? Will
> the current tutorials be used instead?
> For instance, in Catalan we don't an advanced PO file translated,
> but the tutorial exists. I agree that PO files is the best, but
> for now I want to ensure that the old svg tutorials will be
> included. I'm right?
Yeah, copying them over to the directory where Inkscape finds them
is still done regardless of how they were generated (it just looks
at what SVG files are around, so no problem there. You just won't
get a HTML version then.
I just updated all the generated tutorial translations and committed
them to SVN, so please check if everything is right.