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: i18n/l10n summary Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 17:39:23 +0300 Message-ID: <83inij8bfo.fsf@gnu.org> References: <0aca6c65-4610-44c2-99c4-6cbe7aa68c9a@default> <46B40C87-EAE0-4DDA-AF4D-EF6392FF8A47@gmail.com> <83r2x88vuc.fsf@gnu.org> <10CB5E42-71F8-4F2F-80BD-A661062E9CD2@gmail.com> <83pocs8sy1.fsf@gnu.org> <3D8D36E8-D1F8-4733-A94F-AE5A61E1C528@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1500820823 10254 195.159.176.226 (23 Jul 2017 14:40:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 14:40:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jean-Christophe Helary Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 23 16:40:17 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 1dZI3G-0001nr-PF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Jul 2017 16:40:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50651 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dZI3H-0007km-LQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Jul 2017 10:40:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38475) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dZI2d-0007kc-EC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Jul 2017 10:39:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dZI2Y-0005eD-Bc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Jul 2017 10:39:31 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:57749) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dZI2Y-0005dx-7v; Sun, 23 Jul 2017 10:39:26 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1847 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dZI2X-0004de-K2; Sun, 23 Jul 2017 10:39:26 -0400 In-reply-to: <3D8D36E8-D1F8-4733-A94F-AE5A61E1C528@gmail.com> (message from Jean-Christophe Helary on Sun, 23 Jul 2017 08:54:36 +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:216946 Archived-At: > From: Jean-Christophe Helary > Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 08:54:36 +0900 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > >> After checking the files I realized that all had "@include docstyle.texi" which already had "@documentencoding UTF-8", so I just added "@documentlanguage en_US" there. > > > > en_US is the default in the absence of an explicit @documentlanguage, > > so I'm not sure I understand why would we need to add it. It will > > change nothing, AFAIK. > > When po4a extracts translatable text to create the pot files docstyle.texi will also have a pot file that includes "@documentlanguage en_US" and that will allow translators to change that to "@documentlanguage fr_FR" etc. If we don't had that to docstyle.texi somebody will have to add the language string manually and that's an extra task that we'll have to check. Sorry, I don't think I follow. Does po4a understand Texinfo in general and the @documentlanguage directive in particular? If it does, why doesn't it also know that en_US is the default when no such directive is present? And if it doesn't understand Texinfo, why would the presence of @documentlanguage change anything in its output? And where would someone need to add the language string manually -- in what file? Thanks.