...  which makes your first request (simple directive to select directory)
seem like the simplest and perhaps correct solution for Sphinx Documents...

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Christophe de VIENNE
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

>
> This way would look a lot like gettext integration.
>
> Sphinx would submit any paragraph or title it meets to gettext, and we
> would "only" have to write an adequate extractor, probably a new
> sphinx builder.
>
> This way there would be no need to modify any extension, and the
> "translate" directive would become almost unnecessary.
>
> That said, I do not know how painfull it would be to translate big
> portions of text with gettext (I mean compared to short strings).
>
> thinking too...
>
> 2008/11/20 Yarko Tymciurak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > ...still thinking out loud, I think it would be easier to give someone a
> > file to translate (perhaps?) if the idiom followed something along these
> > lines:
> > .. translate::  "some string"
> > and
> > .. translate::  %lang%/chapter1.rst
> >
> > for translated rst files
> > The advantage would be to have one place where %lang%_strings.rst, and
> the
> > various other files (e.g. chapter1.rst) existed.  Simultaneous
> translation
> > efforts of a work (at least) would not need to be merged then.
> > I think the only work would be (in the second case) to do %lang%
> > substitution before a simple include directive, and a Python dictionary
> > lookup on a file named by convention in the first case.
> > I wonder how terrible the lookups could get, and (to keep consistent w/
> > behavior of other directives) how to manage paragraph translations, such
> as:
> > .. translate::
> >   * a list
> >   * of items
> > ... still thinking...
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 5:25 AM, Christophe de VIENNE <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> 2008/11/17 Yarko Tymciurak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> > I am thinking out loud here:
> >> > This is an interesting question.
> >> > I can imagine for some types of text (i.e. instructions)  it would be
> >> > easier
> >> > to keep consistent is the various language versions were in the same
> >> > file,
> >> > output by selector (so the .rst files themselves become self-contained
> >> > translation files), and for other situations (where concepts are more
> >> > important) that context be coherently developed in one language.  I
> >> > wonder
> >> > if having the former structure  (language conditional selector) could
> be
> >> > the
> >> > useful base - and larger context sections be included from files, e.g.
> >> > something that looks like:
> >> > --------------------------------
> >> > .. lang:: en
> >> > Contents
> >> > .. lang:: fr
> >> > Contenu
> >> > .. lang::  it
> >> > Soddisfare
> >> >
> >> > .. include::  chapter1.%lang%.rst
> >> > or perhaps
> >> > .. include::  %lang$/chapter1.rst
> >> > ------------------------------------
> >> > The form I've written might be wrong - I mainly want to get the
> concept
> >> > accross .... at the top of the file, or at build time, some language
> (or
> >> > lang) setting would be made...
> >>
> >> Ideally we would have a "languages" variable in conf.py, along with a
> >> default_language.
> >> If such options are used, the builders would be run one time for each
> >> language and the language code appended to the output directory name.
> >>
> >> > I wonder if this wouldn't be useful and flexible idiom for authors?
> >>
> >> It think it looks great. That would be perfect for my needs
> >>
> >> > Reasonable to implement?
> >>
> >> I have no idea. If it is, I would be happy to give a hand.
> >>
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Yarko
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 5:27 AM, Christophe de VIENNE
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> I will need to maintain my documentation in french and in english. I
> >> >> would like to know if some of you do such a thing, and how to you
> >> >> proceed ?
> >> >> My idea is to have two different roots, en and fr which are totally
> >> >> independent. I wonder if there is anything in sphinx to make this
> >> >> easier.
> >> >>
> >> >> Especially for the autodoc extension : It would be great if I could
> >> >> have both versions as docstrings with a directive to tell sphinx the
> >> >> language of the text.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for any hint on this issue,
> >> >>
> >> >> Christophe
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > >
> >
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sphinx-dev" 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/sphinx-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to