Greetings all,
Having a bit of a problem understanding the use of the x-po-autocomment
vs 'note from' developer, but in all probability this could just be a
lack of understanding of the xliff specification. From the example xliff
files I have, it's a duplication of information in all circumstances.
Example:
<context context-type="x-po-autocomment"> TRANSLATORS: please
limit the page width to 79 characters here
</context>
</context-group>
<note from="developer"> TRANSLATORS: please limit the page
width to 79 characters here
</note>
If... and please let me know if it's not the case... if the tags are
always contain the same information as one another, shouldn't we remove
one of them? If so, my vote would be for the removal of the context-type
tag, since we are moving towards the 'note' structure in xliff, and
change of code to reflect such.
This brings me to the next point, which is why I CC'd this to the devel
list. The use of x-po-autocomment is mostly prevalent throughout the
converter files (essentially from use of getautomaticcomments), which
isn't hard to change with the addition of the getnotes() origin. Though
if there are any uses I missed, or if the x-po-autocomment is part of
some grand scheme of cunning and demise, let me know :)
If anyone has any information regarding the effects of removing
x-po-autocomment, or use of such in coordination with <note from =
developer>, please let me know.
- Capel Brunker
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Translate-pootle mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/translate-pootle
