On 09.04.2013 16:27, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 03:08:33PM +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
>> I assume you mean the command line is not translated as a matter of
>> policy? Technically I see no reason why it cannot be translated. If
>> the reason why we don't is so that scripts can be locale-independent,
>> then it would still be possible to design a UI where the '--accept=X'
>> takes a set of local-independent values for X (so that scripts can be
>> locale-independent) and also a set of localized values for X (for
>> command-line users). I'm not saying we should do this, as that's
>> something for the translators team and the rest of the development
>> community to decide as a group and I'm sure it's been discussed and
>> decided before, I just want to clarify what we're saying here.
> That remark was about command line interfaces in general.
> Generally, commands, subcommands, and option names are in English
> I suppose in theory you could localize subcommand names, option
> names, or even the name of the program binary (might not make much
> sense for 'svn' but for other programs it might make sense).
> But this is generally not done, at least in the realm of UNIX-like
> operating systems. So this kind of thing would be something fairly
> unusual and I don't think time implementing and maintaining such a
> feature is time well spent.
>> In general I think the interactive parts should be localized as much
>> as possible, and if that means we need to do something special to the
>> command-line option processing to ensure the same options can be used
>> both on the command line and interactively, then I think we should do
>> whatever it takes. But I will leave the decision about how much to
>> localize to people such as Mattias and you who have experience of
>> non-English usage (which I don't).
> If people see value in doing so, sure, I won't stand in the way of
> efforts to localize arguments the --accept option supports.
> In theory this means that --accept cannot be used from scripts in locales
> other than "C", because that is one of the few locale names specified
> in the POSIX standard. In practice, locales such as en_US.UTF-8 might
> also work, but there is no common standard for this.
> Not sure what the implications would be on Windows.
I frankly cannot recall a single tool that localizes its command line,
either commands, options or option values. That way lies insanity; you
might as well localize C.
On the other hand, I wouldn't mind localizing the interactive prompts,
except for the actual command codes. So the example French translation
of the conflict prompt makes perfect sense to me.
Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com
Received on 2013-04-09 17:45:45 CEST