So, we could use the strict check as the default one, just keeping in mind
it can shows some (rare) false positives, right?
The other question about this is, is it possible to do this check in DL to
show this typos (like the errors generating POT file are shown, for
example)? It would be realy use
On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 11:30 +0200, Daniel Mustieles García wrote:
> 2013/4/6 Gabor Kelemen
>
>
> I think these kinds of warnings are useful, until it is not
> compulsory
> to fix all of them :).
>
> Why not? I'm not sure about it. If Documentation team ad
2013/4/6 Gabor Kelemen
>
>
> I think these kinds of warnings are useful, until it is not compulsory
> to fix all of them :).
>
Why not? I'm not sure about it. If Documentation team adds some tags to the
original strings, translators should keep those strings. Also, having
freedom to add our own
2013-04-04 16:31 keltezéssel, Ask Hjorth Larsen írta:
> I would like to know how useful this kind of report is. It complains,
> aside from the usual syntax errors, about tags it cannot find in the
> corresponding msgid. This will lead to false positives in cases where
> the translator chooses to
Hi Christian,
If you are planning to implement gtxml in Gtranslator, you might find
useful this bug:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=672080
Ignacio was working on it, and there is a patch attatched, but it isn't
finished. Havind this kind of checks in GTR would be wonderful!
Thanks
HI,
thanks, personally I find those very useful, as mistakes may happen very
easily in translations. Thanks for your work.
I just started fixing the de locale.
Actually I thought about implementing XML syntax check in gtranslator, a
PO file editor.
Am Donnerstag, den 04.04.2013, 16:31 +0200 sc
This question has is being discused here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/pyg3t/+bug/1052399
The main question we have is if all the tags are mandatory or not. If it's
mandatory to have the same tags in the msgstr and the msgid, we should do a
strict check to avoid missing tags in translations; if the
Hello
Below are some error reports for GNOME docs which are considerably
more strict than usual.
I would like to know how useful this kind of report is. It complains,
aside from the usual syntax errors, about tags it cannot find in the
corresponding msgid. This will lead to false positives in c
