CCed you, because sf.net still has problems with my mail Am Dienstag, den 08.05.2007, 08:53 -0500 schrieb Bob Hanson: > 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
Why? Where is the advantage IYO? There are further currently 8 translations with a generic language code and only one case with a variant. > and possibly some only with > > la_co_va.po There is even not a case. > The code I just introduced makes it unnecessary for us to have any po > files of the form: > > la.po How do you want to handle browsers sending, e.g. de_AT, en_US as language code, when you only have de_DE? > What I was thinking is that the base language translation could identify > the country of origin. Hm. I think this violates users setting. Say, someone has set the following locale in his browser: pt_BR, en_US and we only have pt_PT. Where do you know, that the user wants to see pt_PT in this case and not en_US, as defined in his browser preferences. If he want's to see it, he would have added pt or pt_PT at least to his language code preferences. > If the programs that compile .po files cannot > support the idea that pt_BR.po derives from pt_PT.po, gettext supports this (not sure about the gettext Java classes - but I guess, they do too). Only the GT class probably doesn't. The idea behind having e.g. de.po and de_AT.po is, that the variant file de_AT.po only contains the translations that are different from the one in the generic de.po. So the translating class/function should get the string from the right resource. Say e.g. the official program contains the string "January" and "February". Then de.po would contain "Januar" and "Februar" and the de_AT.po would contain "Jaenner" but no translation for February. So a user with a de_AT would see "Jaenner" and "Februar", whereas the user with a de_DE locale would see "Januar" and "Februar". So normally the pt_BR.po variant file should contain only these strings, that are different from the pt.po file. (AFAIK how it should work using gettext library) > then I think I can > add a bit of code to get around that. What do you think? I don't feel confident with your suggestion atm. I violates the common usage of po files. Regards, Daniel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
