Re: Summary (Re: A system for localizing documentation strings)

[Miles Bader <miles.bader@necel.com>]

Jean-Christophe Helary <fusion@mx6.tiki.ne.jp> writes:
>> Would it count as close enough to "without having to refer" if access
>> to the separate file were automated?  Go to function (perhaps with
>> `find-function'), then invoke a hypothetical M-x
>> find-doc-translations (which would prompt for a function but default
>> to the one at point) to go to its bank of docstrings?  This would be
>> completely non-intrusive, and trivial to implement.
>
> Where would be the translated string in that case ?
>
> The idea is that the coder should be able to have the translated  string
> in a position equivalent, or similar, to the English string.

Why?  Who cares as long as it's _convenient_...

Such a could:

  (1) display the translated string in the echo-area when you move the
  cursor over the "key" string in the source code, and

  (2) offer a simple keybinding which pops the cursor into the
  translation file in another window, with point positioned on the
  translated string (similar to how `find-function-at-point' works).

That would make both source browsing and translation work easy, and
would be easier to implement than some kind of automatic overlay
mechanism.

-Miles

-- 
`...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive
 that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products
 less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.'  [The Economist]