Nico, I just checked in some changes for GT. There was a bug there will cause an exception if the default language includes a variant or if the user specifies a variant.
In addition, The coding changes I introduced makes it possible to have all po files in the form la_co.po and possibly some only with la_co_va.po The code I just introduced makes it unnecessary for us to have any po files of the form: la.po What I was thinking is that the base language translation could identify the country of origin. If the programs that compile .po files cannot support the idea that pt_BR.po derives from pt_PT.po, then I think I can add a bit of code to get around that. What do you think? Bob Nicolas Vervelle wrote: >For the moment, I have taken the solution that's not modifying the >current pt translation, so I have added your translation as pt_BR. >We can change this if you think an other option is better. > >I am releasing 11.1.35 so that a first version with pt_BR can be tested. > >The current pt_BR.po files contains 6 + 11 fuzzy translations. >That's the translations appearing on a yellow background at the >beginning of the list in poEdit. >Fuzzy translations mean translations that need to be reviewed by the >translator. >When a translation is marked fuzzy, it's not used in the release of Jmol. >If the translation is correct, you need to remove the fuzzy mark by >clicking on the ghost icon to have the translation used in Jmol > >Nico > >Nicolas Vervelle wrote: > > >>Sérgio Ceroni da Silva wrote: >> >> >>>Dear Nico and Angel >>> >>>I've just finished the pt-br translation (attached files) using the >>>pt.po 7542 >>>(http://jmol.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/jmol/trunk/Jmol/src/org/jmol/translation/Jmol/) >>> >>>and pt.po 7600 >>>(http://jmol.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/jmol/trunk/Jmol/src/org/jmol/translation/JmolApplet/). >>> >>> >>>I'm not sure which would be best: replacing pt or creating a pt-br. >>>BTW, the pt files contain a fair amount of errors. >>> >>> >>Thanks a lot for the translation. >>Since I am not speaking Portuguese, I can't say which would be best. >>Tell me which would be best in your opinion. Any one speaking >>Portuguese ? >> >>Options : >>- replacing pt by Sergio translation (pt-BR). >>- adding Sergio translation as pt-BR. >>- moving current pt translation as pt-PT and adding Sergio translation >>as pt. >> >> >> >>>Regards >>>Sérgio >>> >>>PS: just find out JmolApplet pt.po went up to 7617. Is it necessary >>>to redo the translation? >>> >>> >>The .po files are frequently updated (when, in the source code, adding >>new texts, modifying existing texts, ...) >>No need to redo the translation each time : >>the tools we are using simply mark which translations need to be >>updated or added in the .po files. >>After that, it's up to the translator to decide when he wants to >>update the translation. >> >>Once we have decided which option we take for pt / pt_BR, I will add >>your translation and the .po files will be updated. >>If you want, then you can update the translation for the last >>modifications that occured in the source code. >> >>Nico >> >> >> >> >> > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express >Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take >control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. >http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ >_______________________________________________ >Jmol-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Jmol-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers
