Received: from localhost (maia-4.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715159FBA54 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:10:09 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 80130-06 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:10:04 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: delayed 00:28:44.716916 by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from imap.cs.msu.su (imap.cmc.msu.ru [212.192.248.39]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 521809FBA6B for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:10:02 -0400 (AST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (oc.cmc.msu.ru [10.3.109.232]) by imap.cs.msu.su (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id l1DKev1h074083 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 23:40:59 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from borz_off@cs.msu.su) Message-ID: <45D2226B.6060502@cs.msu.su> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 23:41:15 +0300 From: Alexey Borzov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2pre) Gecko/20070111 SeaMonkey/1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Josh Berkus CC: pgsql-www@postgresql.org, Tino Wildenhain , Magnus Hagander , Guillaume Lelarge , Peter Eisentraut , Adrian Maier Subject: Re: Multi-language to be or not to be References: <45CF18A1.1090903@hagander.net> <45D0E362.1020903@hagander.net> <45D1549B.2080407@wildenhain.de> <200702131020.06670.josh@agliodbs.com> In-Reply-To: <200702131020.06670.josh@agliodbs.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.7/2562/Tue Feb 13 18:18:56 2007 on imap.cs.msu.su X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.336 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=BAYES_50, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200702/207 X-Sequence-Number: 11612 Hi, Josh Berkus wrote: > I have to say "I told you so". When the existing translation scheme was > built two+ years ago, I pointed out that it was cumbersome, confusing and > inaccessable and predicted that none of our non-English communities would use > it. The main problem as "I told you back then" is that a person willing to contribute to the website has to jump through a lot of hoops. As you probably noticed, potential translators who participated in this thread had no clue about the possibility of website translation. To know about that requires either searching the archives of pgsql-www or looking at pgweb module on gborg (which is itself "deprecated" for quite a bit of time). So to learn about translation infrastructure one essentially has to already know about translation infrastructure. > So, my vote is that whether or not we have *an* translation infrastructure, > the current incomplete and non-standard infrastructure be junked. It's never > going to be used in its current form. Well, even if you create a complete and standard infrastructure you'll still need to translate at least 1) Script messages and words from common templates. This can be done now through complete and standard gettext. 2) Content stored in database (news and such). There is an interface for this now, though it may require polishing (no one can say for sure, 'cause no one actually *used* that). The only real problem IMO is "static" pages containing a lot of text and stored in CVS currently. It wasn't the brightest idea back then and they probably belong in the database, alongside all other stuff.