Le dimanche 27 novembre 2011 à 23:17 +0100, Vladimir Perić a écrit :
> On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Joachim Durchholz <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> > Am 27.11.2011 22:50, schrieb Ondřej Čertík:
> >>
> >> I am now trying to convert the Czech translation to a .po file and it
> >> is a lot of work, so I think it's much better if the translation
> >> itself is in a .po file.
> >
> > Hmm... the gettext toolchain is prepared to write your own text extractors.
> > (Those for C source code look for _("..."), for example.)
> 
> The Python one works the same, I know GRAMPS uses it (but I've no
> experience with it exactly, I've just translated some things).
> 
> >
> > If there's a gettext extractor for the markup used in the tutorial, it
> > should be able to automatically extract a skeleton from the English
> > originals.
> > I think an extractor is the first thing you need to reasonably work with
> > gettext. Creating .po files manually is possible, but you'd have to keep
> > them in sync with the markup text manually, which makes the whole effort of
> > using gettext pointless.
> >
> > BTW you do not need a hash. The gettext tools will simply check whether .po
> > and source are in sync.
> 
> Yeah, if we do decide to do anything with these, I'm absolutely
> positive we should go for gettext integration as it's a very robust
> system and there's really no reason not to. For the moment, though, I
> of course agree with Ondřej - as long as we have the texts we should
> definitely use them. Lets just add a date-stamp to each file and be
> done with "versioning" them.

I don't think we need to do version control manually, we should just use
the git history for that.
> 
> Still, I'd like to make a case again for *not* doing any translating:
> SymPy is, at it's core, a program that's aimed at academia and people
> with at least some sort of math background. Most of these will have
> good knowledge of English, both mathematicians and physics and
> engineers. Yes, I know how much Czech (French, whoever) people like
> their language, but the fact is that English is the language of
> programming, hence also the language of Python and therefore the
> language of SymPy. Whatever we do our methods are always going to be
> called "solve", "transpose" or whatever, and they'll never use
> translated names. Therefore SymPy will never be usable by someone who
> has no knowledge of English and trying to keep translated
> documentation is going to be tedious at best and plain pointless at
> worst.
> 
> On the other hand, I of course recognize the importance of
> translation, as we do live in an international word after all. So I
> support completely all efforts to translate the webpage, or our
> interface if we had one (well, SymPy Live can be considered an UI), I
> just don't think it's worthwhile for us to translate our documentation
> or bother at it at all. Aaron himself said the only reason he added
> translation tasks is because Google required it.
> 
> But hey, that's just my view.

Language competence isn't a binary thing. I'm sure that a large majority
of French Python programmers can understand a typical docstring, but
most of them are probably not comfortable reading a long text in
English. Having a tutorial in French can give them an easy entry point,
allowing them to decide whether it's worth their time to make the effort
of understanding the rest of the docs.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sympy" 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/sympy?hl=en.

Reply via email to