Not po-reluctant. Some formats are better translated in tools that
provide other functions: sentence segmentation (srx or not) for
leveraging translation memories is not available in .po tools (as far
as I know).
Besides, the translation memory standard is xliff, not po. So your
schema should be:
translation tool (plenty of xliff tools)
conv tl |<------------------------------->|
original file <--> xliff file| |
translator
|<---> other format (incl po)<--->|
conv tl transl tool
Are there so many advantages using xliff? I do not nothing about this
format I just started googling.
maybe you want to look at these links besides for all the oasis pages:
http://xliff-tools.freedesktop.org/snapshots/po-repr-guide/wd-xliff-
profile-po.html
http://xml.sys-con.com/read/121957_1.htm)
there are a number of tools that handle documentation files in xliff
while I don't see how an html manual could confortably (for the
translator that is) be handled as a .po file.
Right now, when you have the GUI as .po and the rest as whatever
format, how do you leverage the memories from the .po translation to
the doc translation and reciprocally ?
also the fact that using xliff will open the world of gettext
localization to the rest of the localization world and most probably
drive non-gettext localizers to the world of free software.
Jean-Christophe Helary
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
