From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Subject: Re: Multi-language to be or not to be
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 11:51:34 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5
Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org, Adrian Maier <adrian.maier@gmail.com>
References: <45CF18A1.1090903@hagander.net>
	<200702121016.11272.peter_e@gmx.net>
	<20070212093602.GF4432@svr2.hagander.net>
In-Reply-To: <20070212093602.GF4432@svr2.hagander.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200702121151.36608.peter_e@gmx.net>

Am Montag, 12. Februar 2007 10:36 schrieb Magnus Hagander:
> A .po file is easier than a plaintext file?

Definitely.

> Well, I'm don't do much 
> translating myself, but I can't see how translating a webpage can be
> easier than translating the actual text of the webpage in the file...

One advantage is that it is disassociated from the particulars of the source 
format and the details of how to get it and how to send it back.  Another 
advantage is that there is an established and powerful toolset for editing, 
merging, and managing translations.

> Well, I stand by that opinion. I know for examlpe pgAdmin only ships
> translations that are n percent or better (iirc, it's 85% or so), which
> makes it reasonable. Shipping something that only has 15% translation
> rate does the user a disservice, imho.

It's one thing to reject web *pages* that are less than 85% or even 100% 
translated.  But no one can require a 85% or 100% translated web *site*.  Not 
even Microsoft or IBM can manage that.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/