Tina Petzel <[email protected]> writes: > It would rather be thinkable have the english documentation as a master > document > and use automated tooling to create the localizations from diffs — > recognizing outdated blocks on the > fly and potentially falling back to the original English text, as is done in > pretty much any concept of > software localization out there.
That sounds interesting. With guile-texinfo it should be pretty easy to realize with basic texinfo, but the Lilypond texinfo format includes commands that aren’t supported there. Example: $ guile -c '(import (texinfo))(display (call-with-file-and-dir "Documentation/en/web/introduction.itexi" texi-fragment->stexi))' texinfo.scm:92:2: In procedure command-spec: Throw to key `parser-error' with args `(#f "Unknown command" divClass)'. Does lilypond already include more extensive texinfo parsing support? > translation for the same node which would have a fingerprint of the original > node annotated, > check the fingerprint, and if it matches replace the content of the node, > else issue a warning > and use the original node. … > @ignore > source-commit: e5a609e373eae846857f9a6d70a402a3d42b7d94 > source-sha256: > c746ad20e3ba4ddde5e132499c2e85a432fe0dadb875bee03b0a3980782a0edc > @end ignore > @node Text > @chapter Text Why would you include the source-commit? To get a diff of the original English and the new English version? > which is ... well, okay, but not very well written German. Yes, by additional > prompt we could > get it to be more idiomatic. But still this shows that the output from > something like chatGPT > is just a machine translation. THank you for testing! Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein, ohne es zu merken. https://www.draketo.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
