Hi Rimas, all
Le 27 janv. 2015 19:32, Rimas Kudelis r...@akl.lt a écrit :
Hi Jan,
2015.01.26 16:43, Jan Holesovsky rašė:
Mihovil Stanić píše v Po 26. 01. 2015 v 10:25 +0100:
Cosmetic changes (~ to _ or Status to Status: or ... to … or those
different quote styles I don't even have on
Hi Jesper,
Jesper Hertel píše v Út 27. 01. 2015 v 14:08 +0100:
That's why we were thinking of a en_US version as a real
language and
different from the sources and
But at some stage this will have to apply to the sources
Why?
Because the
Hi Jan,
2015.01.26 16:43, Jan Holesovsky rašė:
Mihovil Stanić píše v Po 26. 01. 2015 v 10:25 +0100:
Cosmetic changes (~ to _ or Status to Status: or ... to … or those
different quote styles I don't even have on my keyboard) and anything
similliar - NOT OK if you don't script it for all
PS the current setup is not foolproof either as we sometimes get really
bad strings, linguistically bad that is.
If this is such a concern, then why don't we set up a panel of
experiences localizers who are willing to help developers judge if a
change is semantic or cosmetic before we land
A person who cannot decide if a string change is semantic or cosmetic to
en-US should not be messing around with the string names in the first
place, if you ask me.
Ok so maybe occasionally they might get it wrong. That still produces a
lot LESS workload to fix that landing 2000 cosmetic
Hi :)
Yeh i think Sophie did such a brilliant job of summarising all the
points that no-one had anything to argue against.
My main concern was about automating the bits that could be automated
in some sensible way - preferably some way that each language could
select to opt into or out of. In
2015-01-26 12:15 GMT+01:00 Tom Davies tomc...@gmail.com:
Hi :)
Hi Tom!
Yes that suggestion was put forwards in the previous thread
Good! And thank you for telling me that.
and i still think it is an excellent idea - or at least has a lot of merit.
I absolutely agree ;-).
I seem to
Not sure what can we add here?
You summed it up nicely in those 3 points.
As far as I'm concerned, en_us can be changed/improved as much as anyone
wants... only if they provide script for automatic update for all other
affected languages.
New strings - OK
Edited strings with changed meaning,
