From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Before l10n, better practices for (message) ? Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 11:07:15 +0300 Message-ID: <83r2zcjb2k.fsf@gnu.org> References: <2623E5C5-4D40-4C9F-BFF6-181D2E69F984@gmail.com> <831srgnuyc.fsf@gnu.org> <6BED2506-B1C2-4005-AFDE-2BF04209F16C@gmail.com> <83zie3mndz.fsf@gnu.org> <83inkrm1ca.fsf@gnu.org> <7C2AD6EB-134C-4013-BE3F-6B302A9DBF8D@gmail.com> <67076bf4-0272-0219-88aa-1f6410fe92de@cs.ucla.edu> <7F5DC149-A21B-4A0F-B1EC-3CC66DD24873@gmail.com> <83y3tmkr1v.fsf@gnu.org> <26eb65ca-4a37-e707-8090-428fd70ac695@cs.ucla.edu> <1BF0657B-5A1E-4527-AACC-54E5224C5DB7@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1495786139 1191 195.159.176.226 (26 May 2017 08:08:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 08:08:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, Emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jean-Christophe Helary Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 26 10:08:55 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dEAIm-0008Ug-DC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 May 2017 10:08:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35436 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dEAIm-0003rZ-SL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 May 2017 04:08:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58341) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dEAHJ-0002LU-Au for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 May 2017 04:07:22 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dEAHG-0004PM-5c for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 May 2017 04:07:21 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:56239) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dEAHG-0004PC-2K; Fri, 26 May 2017 04:07:18 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3578 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dEAHF-0000rC-2I; Fri, 26 May 2017 04:07:17 -0400 In-reply-to: <1BF0657B-5A1E-4527-AACC-54E5224C5DB7@gmail.com> (message from Jean-Christophe Helary on Thu, 25 May 2017 07:35:07 +0900) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:215207 Archived-At: > From: Jean-Christophe Helary > Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 07:35:07 +0900 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , > Emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > There is no point to straightening up strings if we don't have a translation infrastructure. > > As the title suggests I was talking about better practices for UI messages regardless of whether we do l10n or not. > i18n and l10n are one thing, but having manageable strings that don't generate grammatical errors because developers consider elisp as a macro language for Natural Languages is a different thing. > > It is not even a chicken and egg situation. Fixing strings and setting rules for developers will benefit all users right now. And we can also work on i18n, which is a totally different thing and requires a skill set that I'm pretty sure I don't have right now (while figuring out what a complex concat does is reasonably within what I can do right now). I see your point. However, it seems to me that maintaining our doc strings in good translatable order without actually having the ability to translate them will impose a burden on the contributors which we will be unable to justify in good faith. So, although the initial work, if done by you or some other motivated individual, should be well within our reach, it is its maintenance henceforth that bothers me. Once we do have some minimal infrastructure for translations, we then can ask the contributors to comply with its requirements without having any moral dilemmas. > And as I just wrote to Eli, I'm fine with helping in that area but there are people who are much more qualified in terms of experience with Emacs and Elisp. My priority right now is to learn about Emacs and Elisp while helping where I can, and that does not include creating a full i18n infrastructure on my own. Thank you. I do encourage you (and anyone else who is interested) to start thinking and working on such an infrastructure. My advice would be to have this high-level goal guide you in your study of Emacs and ELisp, i.e. I suggest to focus on those parts in Emacs that are most relevant to that goal. Then 2 good things will happen: (1) you will have a specific practical goal and context for using your new knowledge, and (2) you move closer to your goal by learning the relevant stuff and coding relevant features.