Not sure. I think this largely depends on how many views you want to translate. If there are only some (e.g. ActionMailer notification views) that you want to translate as a whole while everything else uses the usual way of translating with I18n.t then having an extra directory seems like overkill to me ... and the current implementation much nicer.
Why not ship the current implementation as a simple way with Rails core and still have José's plugin available for people who want to rely on this approach for most of their views? Do these approaches necessarily clash? On 31.01.2009, at 11:32, Clemens Kofler wrote: > > I agree with José - for the same reasons he mentioned. Maybe it makes > sense to just drop the current implementation and include the > localized templates plugin (if that's possible)? > > - Clemens > > On Jan 30, 6:33 pm, José Valim <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi guys, >> >> I just saw that localized templates is now part of rails core >> (http:// >> github.com/rails/rails/commit/ >> a98cd7ca9b2f24a4500963e58ba5c37d6bdf9259). But I would like to >> discuss >> how it was implemented. >> >> I'm the maintainer of Localized Templates plugin (http://github.com/ >> josevalim/localized_templates/) and before implement it we had a >> discussion on I18n group how it should work. >> >> The first version of Localized Templates had the same "schema" as in >> Rails core. Assuming MessagesController, index action and locale pt- >> BR, our localized file would be: >> >> app/views/messages/index.pt-BR.html.erb (controller/ >> action.locale) >> >> But the suggestions in I18n group defined a schema like this: >> >> app/views/pt-BR/messages/index.html.erb (locale/controller/ >> action) >> >> I already worked with both schemas and I personally think that >> "locale/ >> controller/action" is much better. I've talked with 5 or 6 other >> people that were also using Localized Templates and they all had the >> same point of view. >> >> There are two main reasons: >> >> 1. It's easier to translate: in "locale/controller/action" schema, >> to create a new language we just have to copy and paste the locale >> root and start to translate. When using Rails current schema, we have >> to go in each controller folder and rename all files... at the end I >> was seriously thinking in developing a rake task that could do it for >> me. >> >> 2. It's easier to mantain: in Rails current schema we usually end >> up >> with our controllers folders full of files (4 locales x 4 files = 16 >> files). In the second schema everything is organized by locale roots. >> >> Anyway, I brought this discussion to know what people think about >> both >> schemas and which one would be the best for Rails core. >> >> Well, that's all. :) >> >> Cheers, >> >> José Valim. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
