1 |
On Thursday 08 January 2004 09:00, foser wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 17:01, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
3 |
> > Regardless of i18n, isn't it good design to have all user interaction |
4 |
> > done in one place? Specifically, shouldn't any messages/errors/etc be |
5 |
> > passed back to the user interface using exception-like mechanisms? Not |
6 |
> > only would it make i18n a lot easier, it doesn't inhibit possible uis. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> You want modules to pass their own messages back and forth, yes you can |
9 |
> probably use generic callbacks and fallback messages. But having all |
10 |
> messages (or interaction) in one place with a full plug-in system isn't |
11 |
> gonna work i think. Module writers probably do want to use their own |
12 |
> strings for specific messages. |
13 |
|
14 |
Yeah, I guess, if user-interfaces need to be self-contained enough to be able |
15 |
to work with any support modules. Still, I think that some mechanism that |
16 |
forces module writers to not use embedded strings would be a good idea, |
17 |
though, even when modules are able to specify their own strings. Most (no?) |
18 |
module writers are able to internationalize into all languages, so it would |
19 |
be good if anybody could come along and easily do a translation. |
20 |
|
21 |
I still think it would be a good idea for modules to be to refer to a set of |
22 |
predefined strings such as "Searching for ...", "... depends on ..." or |
23 |
whatever so that module writers have to worry about i18n as little as |
24 |
possible. It also makes for a more unified user interface. |
25 |
|
26 |
-- |
27 |
Regards, |
28 |
Jason Stubbs |
29 |
|
30 |
-- |
31 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |