-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >> Using FQCN as prefix will make it impossible to avoid duplicated >> translations. > > You mean, when the exact same message is used by two separate classes?
Exactly > If yes, in that case, you're right, a global key without any prefix would be > more appropriate. > > > One more question about possibility "a": Does this possibility mean that for > each message a "public static String" would be created for the key in a class > or interface, as well as the same key (with the translated value) in the > various properties files? Well .... There's no need to have it as "public static String", but it make things easier to garantee the uniqueness of a key. I'm don't know what happens when having a key twice in a properties file. Do you get an error? Is the first/latest matching taken? But I see your fear to overload the code with public static variables. That's why I put this for discussion. Regards Felix -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAktd9oIACgkQ2lZVCB08qHHgIACfaOvPW/D2bdh5x387W32xe95l l4IAoMsXb9r1Y2aZetWN55Z94o2oDPX8 =4Ktm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
