On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 13:15 +0200, Christian Lippka wrote:
> Michael Meeks wrote:
> > There was some resistance to nominating this for 3.0 because ChristianL
> > wanted to re-do the translation work to use Java Properties instead of
> > the new transex tool we wrote that translated complete XML files
> > per-lang.
Ah ! - finally I see your reply while looking for something else in the
archives ;-) [ a CC is most appreciated when using the collab-lists ].
> This is bogus, I discussed with Jan that in my opinion it is a cleaner
> solution to use the Java Properties file for translation as I think the
> current way of doing it does not fit with the OOo translation database
> and tooling. I wanted to look into it but never said this would be a
> stopper for this cws.
Oh; sorry - presumably I'm confused: but AFAIR there was a concern
about the translation mechanism that held things up. I too like the Java
properties (a bit) now I think about them - but, OTOH - I didn't like
them a while back & I can't remember why ;-) sadly that is all the state
I kept. Nevertheless - I think Java Properties is the direction we want
to go in now.
HTH,
Michael.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
