htdocs and the newest news.

[Neil Williams]

On Friday 10 February 2006 2:28 pm, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Neil Williams <linux at codehelp.co.uk> writes:
> > But, as of now, what is the feeling on the simplified site?
>
> Looks pretty good to me.. 

Thanks.

> > (I'm also going to create some scripts to automate various stages of the
> > translation handling, improve the README and other bits.)
>
> I'm a bit concerned that the translations are done via php.

My reasons were relatively simple: 
1. The old site was already using php, albeit without translation.
2. PHP and gettext work well together
3. Using PHP for all translatable text generates a single POT file which is 
always preferable for translators.

What do you think about translating the news items?

> when I'm working on a web page I don't want to have to make sure
> I get my php quoting syntax correct.  I just want to write the
> text.   This is ESPECIALLY true of the news content, which IMHO
> should just be a text datafile.

No problem, I fully understand. 

My conversion of oldnews.phtml is geared more towards easier translation than 
easier editing because I've specifically excluded as many HTML tags and 
"markers" (like the 'o' at the start of each feature description) from the 
translatable text. oldnews.phtml isn't likely to need much editing, except 
adding existing blocks to the top and maybe siphoning really old content off 
the bottom.

If news isn't to be translated, or at least not translated imminently after 
upload, then the original text format is fine. The script is still in place 
and can easily be modified to a new method.

To make it available for translation, the file would need to be available to 
PHP - otherwise you end up with multiple translation files, as we had in the 
old news method - but all that this means is that news is uploaded as 
text/plain in a file named .phtml instead of .txt.

PHP is sensible enough to wrap includes in the <?php ?> tags anyway.

Then, if or when translation is needed, the strings can be marked up.

The strings do need to be marked up _in the news file_ before the strings can 
be available to be translated. So a text/plain format can't be translated 
as-is, at least without creating a separate translation file.

> (I'll note that my abhorrance of PHP isn't as pronounced as your
> abhorrance to scheme -- but it's pretty close -- I'm at least willing
> to LOOK at php code ;)
;-)

All I can say to that is that php - especially as used in the revamped site - 
is, IMHO, easier to follow than all those unmatched parentheses in scheme!

(and php is only on the website, it's not as critical as the scheme in 
gnucash.)

-- 

Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/attachments/20060210/cab25580/attachment.bin