On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Sridhar Dhanapalan
wrote:
> On 6 September 2012 02:54, Chris Leonard wrote:
>>
>> I believe the OLPC Australia builds may use the en_GB packages (they
>> have 53,000 XOs)
>
> That is correct. Our default language is en_GB.
>
> Sridhar
Now all we need is an e-speak
On 6 September 2012 02:54, Chris Leonard wrote:
>
> I believe the OLPC Australia builds may use the en_GB packages (they
> have 53,000 XOs)
That is correct. Our default language is en_GB.
Sridhar
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
https:/
On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 13:20 +0100, Bruce Cowan wrote:
> There's a tool in the gnome-i18n repository called en_GB.pl. You can
> use en_GB.pl --check to get a list of differences between the expected
> en_GB strings and the translations used. It misses a few ("ize" ->
> "ise"), but it's very useful f
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Bruce Cowan wrote:
> Forwarded to the list because I pressed the wrong button.
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Bruce Cowan
> Date: 5 September 2012 12:36
> Subject: Re: en_GB - Let's not miss these opportunities
> To:
Forwarded to the list because I pressed the wrong button.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Bruce Cowan
Date: 5 September 2012 12:36
Subject: Re: en_GB - Let's not miss these opportunities
To: Chris Leonard
On 5 September 2012 09:40, Chris Leonard wrote:
> Dear en_GB lo
Dear en_GB localizers,
One of the great advantages of the relatively simple "translation" of
en_us POT files into en_GB is that it gives you the opportunity to do
much needed proofreading of the original en_US strings.
I've encountered a few instances where typographical errors in the
en_US origi
