@rvalyi I agree with you, attributes and other API and non API programming things have the same problems as other terminology. But this is ongoing process, and 5.0 is far better than 4.2 ever was. I do not worry much about what's going on behind the scenes, as it would probably scare off only eventual contributors.
The real problem comes from UI, as this scares off customers - the people who actually vote for project. @bhikkhu About en_GB translation, it is not so simple,as it looks like. Language is not used only for UI, but throughout templates and all the system as well. People have product translations... So if implementation has multi-language data it would be inconvenient to change them all to en_GB. Bad terminology case is nothing more than a bug. I can not imagine if someone will walk through all the terms doing evaluation, for all the projects. (500??, I have never counted them...) This is eventual process, misleading terms should be "exterminated" upon finding. There should be terminology team and forum (probably separate from translators), to consult with, if there is need for that. I do not worry about openness of this process as language is probably most "open" thing by it's nature. Probably this can be separate team which files a bug report for translators upon discovery and discussion (if needed) of a problem. Correcting it is technical task. This is not so urgent task to be scared of the process. It is better to have the best quality, than the speed. Kaspars ----------------------- http://kndati.lv -------------------- m2f -------------------- -- http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=45997#45997 -------------------- m2f -------------------- _______________________________________________ Tinyerp-users mailing list http://tiny.be/mailman2/listinfo/tinyerp-users
