[Localization] OLPC Software Code Localization - A Few Things I've Noticed

[Ed Trager]

Hi, Xavier and everyone,

> ET>
> ET>        Does everyone agree that there needs to be a way that
> ET> all of the ".po" files for all languages get updated with the
> ET> latest messages extracted via "xgettext" from the latest
> ET> codebase (toolbar.py, etc.)?
>
> Yes, there's a problem. Reviewing what you've noted, the problem
> appears to be a mix of things. Just for the record, we are
> sticking to the POT files found in d.l.o git (not fedora)
>
> 1) the POT in dlo only has 9 strings
> http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=projects/write;a=blob_plain;f=po/write.pot;hb=HEAD
>
> I personally believe that developers should generate the POT file
> and make sure that it's in d.l.o git.
>

Using the Write activity as an example once again, it doesn't take
that much more work to translate all 32 or 36 msgids in the latest
code base, and the result of doing so will be to have a nearly fully
localized activity.  If only 9 msgids are translated, that is, IMHO, a
much greater problem which will result in the Write activity only
being ~30%* localized which is too low a standard.

(* 30% based on the fraction of translated msgids, not word count)

There is work involved in running "xgettext" against the latest
dev.laptop.org git tree snapshot and then checking the resulting POT
files and merging as needed to get a more nearly complete set of
msgids in the existing PO files in the d.l.o git code base.  But --if
it is not too much work-- it might be worth doing it once to provide a
more uniform base in dev.laptop.org's git repository from which all
developers --soon to be duly informed of their responsibility to help
keep the POT files current from this point going forward-- can work
from.

>
> On top, some of the quirks and particularities of the tools do
> seem to get in the way, but I think that most stem from the fact
> that we don't have a 'base' POT population.
>

Exactly.

>
> Still working on it,
> Xavier
>

And no doubt it is a lot of work, and there are only 24 hours in each
day ... ;-)

>
> PS: The issue regarding lists is an interesting issue that I think
> it may be much broader than the XO... :)
>

Yes, I think the lists issue is much broader than XO too.  OLPC is
already setting new, innovative, and higher standards in many areas,
including the novel area of appropriate internationalization and
localization of software for children.  (Has anyone even done that in
before?  Maybe not).  The OLPC has a unique opportunity to invent good
solutions that set new standards for the rest of the world to learn
from, not just for kids, but for adults as well.

- Ed