On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 04:21:46PM +0100, Joergen W. Lang wrote:
[snip]
> the whole point in using .po is that we do not have to split up the
> .pods ourselves. .po is an internationally accepted standard and a lot
> of editors (Emacs, etc.) support it.
>
> Since an online-translation is only one of two options (people should
> also be able to check out "their" document, translate it, and resubmit).
>
> There is no real "need" for .po - but it makes life a lot easier because
> it provides a lot of features we need, anyway (paragraph-splitting,
> fuzzy marks, id-ing for paragraphs, etc.). so why reinvent the wheel?
>
I'd say we do need .po files as we need an exchange point that is
accessible and transaction safe, so: .po files under revision control.
> (I guess I really have to get the wiki going...:o)
>
Doesn't the word itself implies _that_ when you say it? ;-)
> Gregor Goldbach schrieb:
[snip]
> > now that we have a basic database layout and a few tiny scripts, I was
> > wondering why we need .po-files.
> >
> > We have the original paragraphs from the POD-files and the translated
> > paragraphs. The translated POD-files can be generated by concatenating
> > the translated paragraphs. I don't see any need for .po-files at all.
[snip]
And how is it... are we top-posting or prefer a flamewar about why there's
no reason to top post?! *scnr*
Kind regards,
Simon
|
