Re: Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained
On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 07:29:37PM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 05:17:04PM +0200, Erich Schubert wrote:
> > > 1.- more difficult to translate than sections
> > Don't think so. I think they'll be much simpler, as you don't have to
> > say which mail tools go in there and which not, these keyword-tags are
> > much simpler than the categories.
> No they wont. Keywords will be abused unless you restrict them,
> translators will need to keep more up-to-date the translation list versus
> sections which would be less (and allow, granted, less flexibility) and
> would not change that much over time (until the size of the archive
> explodes again in our face).
A keyword system would have its advantages only if you eliminate synonyms
(eg. if you had "x11" and "xwindows" together, you'd end up with a messier
system than a fixed-category system -- some programs may specify one or
the other, or both, and it just creates a mess), and the keywords are not
volatile. Therefore, we'd need a fixed (or almost fixed) set of
well-known, agreed-on, keywords that covers sufficient grounds for every
Of course, such a list could (and should) grow if necessary; but to avoid
redundancy or inconsistency, we'd need a set of keywords that everybody
(as in, all developers) agreed upon. This way, we can make the translation
job easier--most of the keywords will not change.
Just my $0.02.
Written on the window of a clothing store: No shirt, no shoes, no service.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org