From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs i18n Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2019 22:44:10 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87o97aq6gz.fsf@jidanni.org> <87tvgoud56.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83o96wk2mi.fsf@gnu.org> <87k1hjfvjd.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <871s3p0zdz.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83h8ckezyt.fsf@gnu.org> <83o96qegv1.fsf@gnu.org> <32b1ab1b-bef4-629a-8830-b1dcc6915087@cs.ucla.edu> <83a7iae9va.fsf@gnu.org> <05ed2dec-2a84-f7dc-1af5-c9d923992785@cs.ucla.edu> <87bm2p56gu.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <838sxrdgco.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="186889"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@linkov.net To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 07 04:46:16 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h1jz6-000mWJ-Kv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 04:46:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44616 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h1jz5-0003Is-Jd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 22:46:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58433) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h1jx6-0001en-6L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 22:44:13 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:55781) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h1jx5-0000px-RC; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 22:44:11 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1h1jx4-0003W4-4h; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 22:44:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: <838sxrdgco.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Wed, 06 Mar 2019 20:09:59 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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:233881 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > Second, I don't understand why we are still talking about 'message'. > Most of the user interaction in Emacs that will benefit the most from > translation is not messages we show in the echo area: Emacs actually > doesn't chatter there too much. Most of the stuff that IMO is much > more important to have translated are the doc strings. I think it would be most natural to handle doc strings through a special mechanism. We have already had special mechanisms for them -- I don't know whether we still do. But it is easy for the compiler to find them all and put them in a file for translations. > . Do we use a separate message catalog for each Lisp package, or a > single catalog for all of Emacs? Each alternative has its merits > and demerits. For example, if we go with separate catalogs, then > how do we make the correct bindtextdomain call, given that packages > call each other? I think they have to be separate, and we can use something like lexical binding to specify the right one for each file. This is worth a special mechamism for. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)