> I don't force anybody to use "my pet tool", I just think that the po > format (using xgettext, xml2pot, po4a or whatever) is the best interface > for translators. After this, you are free to use the tools you want. I > think that having the common following interface for every format is > the best way to be flexible: > > conversion tool translation tool > original file <--------------> po file <----------------> translator > > > With this, package maintainers are free to use the format/tools they > want (xml with xml2pot, sgml with po4a, ...); translation teams are free > to use the translation tools they want (text editors, pootle, mail > interfaces, ...).
Yep. What you describe is a situation where PO is the central common format that's used on the central infrastructure. This means that all automation/updateness checking tools that exist for handling PO files can be used on the central system to manage the data presented to users (users here==translators). This does not prevent us to propose translators to get the translation material in whichever format they would like to use....this is what I understand from your above scheme. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
