Le dimanche 02 septembre 2007 à 17:37 +0300, Till Rettig a écrit : [...] > Shouldn't we include the .po files also into check-translation
No, because POs and .(i)telys translation work very differently; check-translation don't modify any file and is used for one language at once, whereas po-update modify files for all languages. > and make the generation a bit more often in order to get the updated > files and see conveniently what should be updated? Well, I don't know > anything about the system how it generates the new entries -- See gettext manual for details. > just saw that in the recent update that I made they were put on top > of old entries, thus leaving the old (wrong) translation valid -- but > marked it with fuzzy. This is of course also a posibility to see what > has been changed... Fuzzy entries are not valid, i.e. gettext don't use them when looking for translations. > > @file and @samp are not macros, they are built-in Texinfo functions. > > 'make web' Texinfo should handle accents generated by @-commands > > according to @documentlanguage. This makes me think there is still a > > shitload of i18n feature requests to be sent to Texinfo developers, but > > this is more easy to say than to do: as they don't have oodles of time, > > it's important to send one small and clear request at once, as it's has > > been done for non-English quotes. > > > > > Did I understand right: the feature is requested but it will take its > time until sombody impelements it? Not really. There are two related but different features: support for printing non-English quotes, which has been implemented, and using the right quotes according to @documentlanguage in output of @-commands, which has not. Cheers, John _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
