1 |
Flammie Pirinen пишет: |
2 |
> 2005-09-08, Jan Kundrát sanoi, jotta: |
3 |
>>d) Outdated translation |
4 |
[...] |
5 |
> After these basics are in order, we might want to start looking in to |
6 |
> peeking original versions of document to see how up to date it is. By |
7 |
> the way, why can't this be done same way as in overview.xml? Because |
8 |
> AFAICS metadoc.xml in Finnish, for example, has only link to either |
9 |
> English or Finnish version, so the xslt must use some logic to fetch |
10 |
> english versions here, no? And if the logic is to pull the stuff from |
11 |
> English metadoc by matching id, shouldn't we then just resolve this by |
12 |
> adding a matching id to the root elements of the documents, which is |
13 |
> something that from semantic pov should've been done from beginning on |
14 |
> already. Of course this'd add overhead of loading (document()ing?) the |
15 |
> metadoc for all pageloads... |
16 |
> |
17 |
Using the link in the document itself ls like any decentralized way: |
18 |
+ efficiency -- no need to parse metadoc for each page |
19 |
+ reliability -- no broken links on metadoc failure |
20 |
+ flexibility -- works with non-metadoc project docs |
21 |
- human factor -- document maintainer is responsible for the link |
22 |
- need to update path in several places if source moves |
23 |
|
24 |
To deal with '-', we need to: |
25 |
maintain personal responsibility for maintainers (actually |
26 |
self-maintained in our case, isn't it?) |
27 |
simply accept the need to update path -- it's already there :-) |
28 |
|
29 |
|
30 |
Using metadoc, the pros are: |
31 |
+ clearness for the lead translator (...or actually not?) |
32 |
+ simplicity of batch update (isn't often? |
33 |
Cons are the opposite. |
34 |
|
35 |
Are we centralized or not? :-) |
36 |
|
37 |
Wkr, |
38 |
Alexey |
39 |
-- |
40 |
gentoo-doc@g.o mailing list |