Nicolas, for a PR, do you feel like we should:
1) accept a backwards-incompatible change and begin nesting under “views:” 2) create a sort of lookup hierarchy like in ActiveRecord model translations that first looks in “views:” then the current path 3) keep the same default but introduce an ActionView setting for a namespace that folks can opt in to On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 2:06:08 AM UTC-6, Nicolas Cavigneaux wrote: > > > Le 3 nov. 2014 à 15:14, Joshua Cody <josh...@gmail.com <javascript:>> a > écrit : > > > Considering the Rails guides give an example structure of nesting view > translations under "views", it feels like using the period convenience with > the t() helper should by default look to the "views" i18n namespace, or at > least provide an ActionView setting for a view namespace. This would bring > the behavior of views more in line with that of models and keep from > polluting the global i18n namespace with view-specific translations. > > > > Maybe I'm totally off-base—does anyone have opinions on this? > > Hi Joshua, I agree with you. I always felt it was some kind of pollution > too. It would be nice if t() helper used with period was using a namespace. > > — > Nicolas Cavigneaux > http://www.bounga.org > http://www.cavigneaux.net > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
