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 toolAre there so many advantages using xliff? I do not nothing about this format I just started googling.
maybe you want to look at these links besides for all the oasis pages:http://xliff-tools.freedesktop.org/snapshots/po-repr-guide/wd-xliff- profile-po.html
http://xml.sys-con.com/read/121957_1.htm)there are a number of tools that handle documentation files in xliff while I don't see how an html manual could confortably (for the translator that is) be handled as a .po file.
Right now, when you have the GUI as .po and the rest as whatever format, how do you leverage the memories from the .po translation to the doc translation and reciprocally ?
also the fact that using xliff will open the world of gettext localization to the rest of the localization world and most probably drive non-gettext localizers to the world of free software.
Jean-Christophe Helary