Denis Barbier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 11:58:51PM -0700, Osamu Aoki wrote: > [...] > > 3. SGML normalization. > > > > Normalizing SGML code. For example, <p> ... -> <p> ... </p>. > > Agree, IMO Debiandoc DTD is too laxist; in order to ease writing parsing > tools, it would really help if optional elements were avoided. > When we discuss on debian-www how to generate XHTML pages, we found that > those optional elements were confusing, e.g. one could want to replace > <p> > <ul> > <li>foo > <li>bar > </ul> > by > <p> > <ul> > <li>foo > <li>bar > </ul> > </p> > whereas this is incorrect and must be written > <p></p> > <ul> > <li>foo > <li>bar > </ul> > > So in this particular case, optional P end element is only useful to > hide misused syntax.
Ok, so you're talking about the DTD. > [...] > > 6. I wish to have some translation framework implemented. > > Me too :) > > > Denis Barbier seems to be developing interesting tool but if it is > > integrated into debiandoc-sgml, it shall be nicer. > > Such a translation framework should be discussed and documented before > it is implemented in debiandoc-sgml; in fact this framework does > certainly not depend upon source format, some general lines could > be drawn. I completely agree. When do we start? > Here are some thoughts, we could discuss them and others on debian-i18n: > * Translated text must be bound to original, i.e. anyone should > be able by reading a translated file either to determine original > file version (this option is used for our web pages) or to be > informed that this translation is outdated (gettext PO files or > Debconf templates files when translated and master templates > are different files). > * For large documents, tools should help tracking which parts are > outdated. This implies that documents may be automatically split > into small pieces (paragraphs, sections, ...). For instance, b-f > installation manual mix marked sections, paragraphs, sections and > optional elements which forbids such a split, so this document > is not easily manageable. We have to find a solution which > provides the same advantages without this drawback. > * Tools should allow translators to add text. > * Encoding must either be utf8 or defined in source file (this is > for instance not the case with Debconf templates files and SGML > documents AFAICT). > * Source files should contain some informations on how to contact > latest translator (as in PO file header). Date information could > also be useful. Very interesting points. These tools should become a layer around DebianDoc. This is gonna be fun! :-) Thanks, Ardo -- Ardo van Rangelrooij home email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] home page: http://people.debian.org/~ardo GnuPG fp: 3B 1F 21 72 00 5C 3A 73 7F 72 DF D9 90 78 47 F9 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
