I'll vote that action names as they are exposed right now should not be localized. If there is a desire to provide a localized form in the future, new API should be introduced for the purposes of keeping backwards compatibility.
Thanks! Will Steve Lee wrote: > My response was more exposition. > Make it a no. > > On 2/14/07, David Bolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Thanks Bill. >> >> So we have a couple of votes for "no". I don't think Steve's was a >> strong "yes"? Especially if we add API down the road, for localized >> version of the name. >> >> Regarding adding a "getLocalizedActionName"... that sounds good except >> might imply to the API reader that the current "getActionDescription" is >> not localized? Probably still the best solution though as I suppose it >> would be a bit more disruptive to go the route of changing getActionName >> to be localized and to add a getUniversalActionName... breaks backwards >> compat. >> >> cheers, >> David >> >> Bill Haneman wrote: >>> At present the set of 'known action names' is pretty small. >>> >>> As such, GOK can call the gettext() macro on the non-localized name, and >>> handle the localization of this small pool of names itself. >>> >>> We intentionally left action names unlocalized to date, because of >>> reasons in your "case for 'no'" below; action names are 'generic' in >>> that they describe a small set of actions that should be common across >>> toolkits; in that sense they are like an enumeration (except that new >>> ones can be added if no old one suffices for a given use case). >>> >>> It would be feasible to add getLocalizedActionName() to the at-spi IDL >>> and to atk, compatibly, as the AtkAction method currently has one unused >>> 'slot'. >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> David Bolter wrote: >>> >>>> Fixed resend of message. >>>> >>>> Should the action names exposed by accessible widgets/components be >>>> localized? >>>> >>>> The case for "yes": >>>> AT like GOK can just expose the localized action names to the user as >>>> GOK keys without having to worry about english user literacy. >>>> >>>> The case for "no": >>>> AT like Orca can do neat things like script for specific action names >>>> such as "cycle" or "toggle", and provide a better user experience. If >>>> Orca scripted for "toggle" but in Klingon it was in fact "snarklegruff", >>>> then the script would fail. Expecting Orca to translate cycle into >>>> Klingon in the same way as the author of the app widget did doesn't seem >>>> reasonable. >>>> >>>> AT-SPI's AccessibleAction_getDescription should of course be expected to >>>> return localized strings. >>>> >>>> I suppose ideally we could have API: >>>> getUniversalActionName >>>> getActionName >>>> getActionDescription >>>> >>>> But we don't. So what should we do? Note: if we say "yes" we still need >>>> to solve the keying off action name problem. If we say no, GOK has the >>>> fallback of using (a hopefully short) action description to build key >>>> labels. If I don't hear back, I'll assume action names are not localized. >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> David >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel >> > > _______________________________________________ Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
