> > Whereas assuming that PHP users are too stupid to understand english is > > not at all arrogant? :) > > Wrong, Sterling. Beginning PHP users might neither have > formal education in computer science _nor_ foreign languages. > The reason here is not about intellect; it is about requiring > certain knowledge. Presuming that someone else must speak > your language is quite self-centered. > > Alas, if your view was correct (users must understand > English), then we could just scrap the whole translation > effort. I don't think that it's realistic. >
Not at all, i don't expect them to speak fluent english, just to understand the small subset of english errors and programming terms. I've conversed with plenty of PHP users (second-hand at least) where they didn't know english, yet understood the error codes. Users need not know english, they can download a quicksheet. If you see Constant 3 And I tell you it means: Undefined constant, assuming string after a while that term will become like your own language, especially if its as simple as copying & pasting, and clicking search. > > What you're missing is that currently to program PHP, you need a reasonable > > understanding of english. > > I don't think so. The translations of the PHP manual do a > fine job at relaying all necessary information about > programming in PHP to speakers of foreign languages. > And they'll do a fine job of explaining the error codes too. > > Educate users to speak the base amount of english required, I18N'ing the > > language is just going to lead to headaches from a user perspective > > (incorrect translations, slower performance, translations for english speakers) > > The performance is negligible -- error messages are displayed > during the development phase, not in a production > environment where run-time behaviour is important. > how do you see this being implemented? > The "incorrect translations" argument applies to all > translations, regardless where and when they are displayed. > Online translations can be centrally maintained, of course, > which is an advantage. This can be addressed by providing > stand-alone message catalogues which can be downloaded by > administrators. > yes, if they update it. If its in the docs, you don't really have to worry about users using an outdated version of the translation. > > and a developer perspective (having to lookup tokens, understanding another > > language, getting bug reports with horrible error messages). > > > > The whole i18n thing can be solved by just listing the translations of > > the error codes on the doc page, let's do that, instead of bloating the > > PHP infrastructure. > > Frankly, so far the discussion has been primarily > developer-focused, which is not too surprising. The > developers are rarely exposed to support requests from > newbies in various non-English forums. > > If PHP is supposed to become easier to use, then native > language error messages would be a big hit. > I agree. Unfortunately I think you mean a big bonus. :))) -Sterling -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
