Il giorno gio, 22/12/2005 alle 20.34 +0900, JC Helary ha scritto: > On 2005/12/22, at 20:04, Thomas Huriaux wrote: > > > It could indeed be a good idea for po-reluctant people. Everybody > > would > > be free to choose either to translate directly po files, or to > > reconvert po files into another format and then translate it. It's > > just a little bit more complex, but it should be doable. > > Not po-reluctant. Some formats are better translated in tools that > provide other functions: sentence segmentation (srx or not) for > leveraging translation memories is not available in .po tools (as far > as I know). > > Besides, the translation memory standard is xliff, not po. So your > schema should be: > > translation tool (plenty of xliff tools) > conv tl |<------------------------------->| > original file <--> xliff file| | > translator > |<---> other format (incl po)<--->| > conv tl transl tool > Are there so many advantages using xliff? I do not nothing about this format I just started googling. Bye Stefano -- Stefano Canepa aka sc: sc@linux.it http://www.stefanocanepa.it Three great virtues of a programmer: laziness, impatience and hubris. Le tre grandi virtù di un programmatore: pigrizia, impazienza e arroganza. (Larry Wall)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part