public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>
To: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>
Cc: Guillaume Lelarge <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is translating server messages really worth it?
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 10:42:41 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
> On 11 Oct 2023, at 05:12, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
> Maybe it'd be worth making a sweep to find messages that we don't
> really think the average user will ever see, and marking those
> as not to be translated. Then going forward, we'd have to have
> a policy that people should think about that when writing new
> errors.
I think that would be a good idea regardless. Lowering the barrier to entry
for a new translation without lowering the quality would make it less daunting
to start a new language, or revitalize a stale one.
We already have a style guide for messages which is followed, adding to it a
policy for internal/translatable messages seems like a low cognitive overhead.
The documentation already have these:
errmsg_internal(const char *msg, ...) is the same as errmsg, except that
the message string will not be translated nor included in the
internationalization message dictionary. This should be used for “cannot
happen” cases that are probably not worth expending translation effort on.
errdetail_internal(const char *msg, ...) is the same as errdetail, except
that the message string will not be translated nor included in the
internationalization message dictionary. This should be used for detail
messages that are not worth expending translation effort on, for instance
because they are too technical to be useful to most users.
Adding section on translated/internal to the style guide might be a good idea.
> I'm not sure how this would play into the upthread point about
> regulatory compliance. If there's somebody out there who has a hard
> requirement for 100% translation, I'm afraid we will never satisfy
> that.
There is that. I think optimizing for making life easier for translators by
allowing them focus on the messages that matter and are expected to be seen is
more important.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
view thread (15+ messages)
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is translating server messages really worth it?
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox