[Po4a-devel][CVS] po4a/lib/Locale/Po4a Xml.pm,NONE,1.1

[Jordi Vilalta]

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Martin Quinson wrote:
[...]
> Ok, sorry for misinterpreting your statement, then. I agree that those tags
> do imply some extra burden on the translator shoulder. But I guess there is
> not much we can do. 
> 
> The solution may come from the editors. kbabel could well have an editing
> mode in WYSIWYG, undertanding and dealing properly with docbook tags. It
> should be doable, but I'm not sure it would be a good idea for now, since
> there is so much possible way to screw things up around.
> 
> As said in the signature of the previous mail, I do belive that things must
> be made as easy as possible, but not easier. ;)

True. I think that the editors shouldn't interpret these things. It's a 
particular thing of po4a, and we should assume that the translators will 
have a minimal intelligence :P

> > > But if I had to redo the man module now, I'd go for docbook-like tag intead
> > > of pod notation. But I don't plan to change that for now...
> > 
> > I think this isn't necessary by now.
> 
> It could be made an option, but the issue is that if the author makes its
> pot with one notation and the translator with another, you'll get fuzzies.

I think we should take an arbitrary decision and don't include this 
option, to avoid this issue about the fuzzies (and to reuse translations 
between projects, where each one could use a different option).

Then, we should decide between one of these:
 1) we use the same tag syntax for all the modules: this makes po4a more 
    consistent (now that it's easy to mix more than one document format 
    with po4a(1)), and maybe some translations could be reused between 
    formats
 2) each module can use its own format tagging: it makes modules easier to 
    write

In my personal opinion, I also like the docbook tagging more than the pod 
one. I'd like to follow the 1) option, although it's a lot of work for 
reworking the current man/pod modules.

> Unless you implement also a on the fly convertion, but I'm not sure it
> worths the work. 

It's an unnecesary complication.

Regards,

Jordi Vilalta