-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

Hi Manuel,

Am 02.06.2006 um 17:01 schrieb Manuel Qui?ones:

Hello, I'm one of the spanish translators.

We have started recently our translation. I was seeing a lot of references to the glossary so I'm working on it now. I came to the problem that a term in spanish may not start with the same character as the original in english, but the terms are arranged by alphabetical order in the files.

I see in the source two approaches on this: the german translation was moved to the corresponding files, and a comment is left in the original file. Other translations like the italian one translated the terms in the place.

well, I think I introduced the german version. AFAIK there was a good reason for this. Lets take color as an example. This would show up in the glossary within the "C" section. The german word for color is Farbe. If I would have inserted the description directly beneath the glossary entry for color in the c.xml it would have shown up as "Farbe" in the "C" section of the glossary - This obviously makes no sense. Therefore I had to move it to the f.xml...

greetings, lexA

Dne p?tek 02 ?erven 2006 17:01 Manuel Qui?ones napsal(a):

errors in the docs. I'm acting as the italian approach for now, so I may move the terms to the right place in the future. But is there a better solution for this?

Czech uses also the "german" approach. It is the correct way, imho.

On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 12:01:48PM -0300, Manuel Qui?ones wrote:

Hello, I'm one of the spanish translators.

We have started recently our translation. I was seeing a lot of references to the glossary so I'm working on it now. I came to the problem that a term in spanish may not start with the same character as the original in english, but the terms are arranged by alphabetical order in the files.

I see in the source two approaches on this: the german translation was moved to the corresponding files, and a comment is left in the original file. Other translations like the italian one translated the terms in the place.

Where (which definitions) are in this way exactly? If it is written in this manner it is not intentional...and the glossary is not finished so it's only a temporary solution...

I think that the german approach is the best, but it's also prone to errors in the docs. I'm acting as the italian approach for now, so I may move the terms to the right place in the future. But is there a better solution for this?

Perhaps the best solution is what you suggested: to translate in place and then move the definitions under the chapter they belongs to in a second time...

Any suggestion for a better approach?

A question about the glossary:
Can we have the same 'id', distinguished with a 'lang="xx", in two different directories. For instance: in p.xml for the english version and 1- in c.xml
or
3- in c.xml ?

Julien

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

Hi Julien,

Am 03.06.2006 um 07:55 schrieb julien:

A question about the glossary:
Can we have the same 'id', distinguished with a 'lang="xx", in two different directories. For instance: in p.xml for the english version and 1- in c.xml for the french
version

It works this way, e.g:

c.xml contains:
Color modes

Modalit? colori
?? ??(Color modes)
Color modes(????)

and f.xml contains:
Farbraum, Farbmodell

Please notice that I left a MARK comment in the place where the glossterm is described for en(glish). This way one can easily find out whether a specific glossterm was already translated to a certain language or not.

or must I have
2- in c.xml ?

Neither is this necessary, nor is it from my pov a good idea to make the id language specific. It just makes things more complicated.

greetings, lexA

Julien