I guess it is true if there is only 2, may be 3 languages to maintain. For more languages it can become really painfull. I can't image maintaining docstrings with 10 languages !
In this later case (a lot of translations), the gettext solution looks more adequate. Any other though on this subject anybody ? Christophe 2008/11/20 Yarko Tymciurak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > ... 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
