Anthony Fok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 29 Jan 2001, zhaoway wrote: >> I don't know. But wouldn't these two same ``zh'' be confusing to >> users?
> Nah, they are both "Zhongwen" afterall. :-) It is just that the users > get to choose between Fanti or Jianti in the next menu, not on the top > menu. :-) Nope. In the first language selection menu, the user sees something like this: zh - 您選擇了簡體中文。請按 Enter 鍵繼續 zh - 您選擇了繁體中文。請按 Enter 鍵繼續 cs - Zvolil jste ee'tinu. Stisknete Enter k pokraeovani With the first line shown in Jianti, and the second shown in Fanti (refer to the <hint> text in chinese_s.src and chinese_t.src to see the actual text). (This is one of the occasions where I wish we have all adopted Unicode... ) This way it would be immediately obvious to the user as to which one to choose. Then, in the second (language variant) menu, the user chooses from possible language variants and keyboard maps. This is better than listing zh_TW and zh_CN in the first menu, because Fanti is not necessarily associated with zh_TW -- we may someday have zh_HK and others. I really should make some screenshots of the first two menus, but I have not yet figured out how that could be done. Perhaps hashao could give us some hint on this one :) > What I am hoping, if possible, and if not too much trouble to maintain, is > to use "zh.po.in" as the source file, whereas zh_CN.po and zh_TW.po will > be generated from zh.po.in with the help of zh-autoconvert, Perl scripts > like tocn.pl and totw.pl, and slice, very much like the Debian Chinese web > pages. :-) Indeed, it should always be a goal for our zh translation efforts. To do this now would require some more manpower, though -- the revised zh_TW.po in the CVS is now very different from the one hashao gave to me, and I believe some of the changes should be migrated to zh_CN.po as well. More on that later... Right now I would rather spend my time addressing the technical issues on using Chinese in the boot floppies (though many of them might not be Chinese specific): line breaking, improper use of sprintf '%20s' to control printed string length, etc. -- Chuan-kai Lin
