On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:06:21 +0100
André Malo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> * Nick Kew wrote: 
> 
> 
> > On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 21:07:55 +0900
> >
> > Takashi Sato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The attached patch stops noting down a outdated warning to XML of
> > > translations.
> >
> > +1 in principle
> > -0 to this exact patch
> >
> > I agree with what you're trying to do.  But I'd be more
> > enthusiastic about it if we added a mechanism to flag that
> > a translation is indeed grossly outdated.
> >
> > At its simplest, perhaps something like:
> > * Document last updated 2008-05-17
> > * [foo] translation last updated 2006-11-03
> >
> > would indicate a document likely to be out of date, whereas
> >
> > * Document last updated 2008-05-17
> > * [foo] translation last updated 2008-11-03
> >
> > tells the reader the translation is current.

Interesting.
This is convenient for readers.

> 
> In case this isn't clear, the comment to be removed is not for readers, but 
> a working note for translators. Additionally (read: conveniently) it's the 
> source for the "outdated" trigger in the transformation process, but that's 
> a different thingy.

Agreed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to