Oh! I thought docstrings to set the language / encoding of the file (self-document), with the directories just containing fully translated sources - entire copies of the work. That seems simple, and ultimately sufficient. It's not a dynamic web site, where one must inject a translated messages in otherwise unknown content.
With Sphinx, the content in total I expect to be translated. Why lookup? (e.g. gettext style)? Why "include other translated file"? Why not just process a file(s) which is(are) the translation? Maybe that is the first question. Simpler is better. And if this is sufficient, then a makefile should be able to handle most (if not all) of this, including common area for media and styling. Really, I think all that is needed is to separate the content files. What do you think? Regards, Yarko On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:23 AM, Christophe de VIENNE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
