[Gimp-docs] Current status on migration to gettext/po

[Ulf-D. Ehlert]

Roman Joost (Montag, 1. September 2008, 21:58):
> Interesting - I still, wonder if we really want to do that. I
> figured, that there is sometimes even more English strings than
> translated strings.

The script shall use English strings if necessary to produce files of 
same structure.

> Do you implement it as a special mode (like the default is the
> docbook mode)?

No, but I use some list of tag names to decide whether or not these 
nodes (tags) are to be processes recursively. These tags are DocBook 
tags, of course.

> > If it really works (I don't promise anything!) these files should
> > work with xml2po's "--reuse" option.
>
> That's actually the thing. I figured today, if there is no 1:1
> mapping between reference and translation language - the whole reuse
> option is b0rked. That's because of the sequential parsing of the
> files. First the translation, than the original XML is parsed (or
> vice versa). Then the translation strings are merged. If we have more 
> translated strings than reference language strings... well - do
> something with it... 

We'll have to throw them away - what else?

> And if the difference between the reference 
> language and the translation already happens in the start of the
> article, the whole *.pot file is messed up.

Yes, and revhistory and indexterm tags are at the top of the XML files, 
causing xml2po to produce garbage right from the beginning...

> Try to test it with the src/dialogs/tools-dialog.xml for example...

Result looks good. Not perfect, but promising.

> Why not merging it?

IMHO there is something wrong if we have to merge two ChangeLogs 
manually...

Ulf