Hi Jan,
2015.01.26 16:43, Jan Holesovsky rašė:
> Mihovil Stanić píše v Po 26. 01. 2015 v 10:25 +0100:
>
>> Cosmetic changes (~ to _ or "Status" to "Status:" or ... to … or those
>> different quote styles I don't even have on my keyboard) and anything
>> similliar - NOT OK if you don't script it
Hi Rimas, all
Le 27 janv. 2015 19:32, "Rimas Kudelis" a écrit :
>
> Hi Jan,
>
>
> 2015.01.26 16:43, Jan Holesovsky rašė:
> > Mihovil Stanić píše v Po 26. 01. 2015 v 10:25 +0100:
> >
> >> Cosmetic changes (~ to _ or "Status" to "Status:" or ... to … or those
> >> different quote styles I don't eve
A person who cannot decide if a string change is semantic or cosmetic to
en-US should not be messing around with the string names in the first
place, if you ask me.
Ok so maybe occasionally they might get it wrong. That still produces a
lot LESS workload to fix that landing 2000 cosmetic en-US
PS the current setup is not foolproof either as we sometimes get really
bad strings, linguistically bad that is.
If this is such a concern, then why don't we set up a panel of
experiences localizers who are willing to help developers judge if a
change is semantic or cosmetic before we land the
Hi Jesper,
Jesper Hertel píše v Út 27. 01. 2015 v 14:08 +0100:
>
> > That's why we were thinking of a en_US version as a real
> language and
> > different from the sources and
>
> But at some stage this will have to apply to the sources
>
> Why?
Because
2015-01-26 12:15 GMT+01:00 Tom Davies :
> Hi :)
>
Hi Tom!
> Yes that suggestion was put forwards in the previous thread
Good! And thank you for telling me that.
> and i still think it is an excellent idea - or at least has a lot of merit.
>
I absolutely agree ;-).
> I seem to remember th
Hi :)
Yeh i think Sophie did such a brilliant job of summarising all the
points that no-one had anything to argue against.
My main concern was about automating the bits that could be automated
in some sensible way - preferably some way that each language could
select to opt into or out of. In wik
Not sure what can we add here?
You summed it up nicely in those 3 points.
As far as I'm concerned, en_us can be changed/improved as much as anyone
wants... only if they provide script for automatic update for all other
affected languages.
New strings - OK
Edited strings with changed meaning,
