No subject

Tue Apr 3 18:36:13 BST 2007

accidentally or intentionally misusing Rosetta.  For example, my project now
has en_GB 'translations' of the original english text, which is quite
useless and which I've refused to include in my releases so far.

regards,
Valient

* Christian Perrier [Tue, Nov 01 2005, 03:25:39PM]:
> Package: encfs
> Version: N/A
> Severity: normal
>
> This package includes a fr_FR.po file which contains the French
translation
> of the program strings.
>
> Using a country part in a translation file is a discouraged practice
> except in very few cases (such as pt_BR).
>
> Using a fr_FR.po file instead of a fr.po file prevents users of fr_CA,
> fr_BE, fr_LU, fr_CH and all other existing and future locales for
> French to benefit from the French translation of the program.
>
> The language does not vary among countries and, again, this is not the
> general practice for programs localization.
>
> Please forward this to the upstream author along with this explanation.
>
> You can also mention that the bug probably occurs for other
> translations. In general PO files should only be named after the
> ISO_639 code of the given language and should not use a country part
> with a ISO-3166 code. The only accepted exceptions to this are:
>
> -pt_BR for Brazilian Portuguese and pt alone for "standard Portuguese"
> -zh_CN for "Simplified Chinese" use in mainland China and Singapore
> -zh_TW for "Traditional Chinese" used in Taiwan
>
> Lat both are different ways of writing Chinese, not to be confused
> with Mandarin/Cantonese which are different ways of *speaking*
> Chinese....both being written the same way.
>

------=_Part_41573_1942891.1175226043339
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I&#39;ve received a request to reduce translation file splintering in my package, which is translated online via Rosetta.&nbsp; The request was routed to me via the debian package maintainer, so I in turn forward it to you for your consideration.
 From my own view, it appears that perhaps translators are either accidentally or intentionally misusing Rosetta.&nbsp; For example, my project now has en_GB &#39;translations&#39; of the original english text, which is quite useless and which I&#39;ve refused to include in my releases so far.
 regards, Valient * Christian Perrier [Tue, Nov 01 2005, 03:25:39PM]: &gt; Package: encfs &gt; Version: N/A &gt; Severity: normal &gt; &gt; This package includes a fr_FR.po file which contains the French translation
 &gt; of the program strings. &gt; &gt; Using a country part in a translation file is a discouraged practice &gt; except in very few cases (such as pt_BR). &gt; &gt; Using a fr_FR.po file instead of a 
fr.po file prevents users of fr_CA, &gt; fr_BE, fr_LU, fr_CH and all other existing and future locales for &gt; French to benefit from the French translation of the program. &gt; &gt; The language does not vary among countries and, again, this is not the
 &gt; general practice for programs localization. &gt; &gt; Please forward this to the upstream author along with this explanation. &gt; &gt; You can also mention that the bug probably occurs for other 
&gt; translations. In general PO files should only be named after the &gt; ISO_639 code of the given language and should not use a country part &gt; with a ISO-3166 code. The only accepted exceptions to this are: 
&gt; &gt; -pt_BR for Brazilian Portuguese and pt alone for &quot;standard Portuguese&quot; &gt; -zh_CN for &quot;Simplified Chinese&quot; use in mainland China and Singapore &gt; -zh_TW for &quot;Traditional Chinese&quot; used in Taiwan
 &gt; &gt; Lat both are different ways of writing Chinese, not to be confused &gt; with Mandarin/Cantonese which are different ways of *speaking* &gt; Chinese....both being written the same way. &gt;

------=_Part_41573_1942891.1175226043339--