Difference between revisions of "Internationalization/tool evaluation"
(→About: Tool Evaluation) |
(→Tasks) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
* give the possibility to translate in a friendly environment | * give the possibility to translate in a friendly environment | ||
| + | Here you'll find the advantages and drawbacks of every tool we evaluate. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Own tool === | ||
| + | That could be a good idea to write our own tools to do these tasks, in particular for a distributed translation (everybody can help on internet). | ||
== problems, ideas, further development == | == problems, ideas, further development == | ||
Revision as of 03:22, 26 April 2006
About: Tool Evaluation
Tasks
The tools we should analyse have several tasks:
- finding the strings into the source code and extract them
- give the possibility to translate in a friendly environment
Here you'll find the advantages and drawbacks of every tool we evaluate.
Own tool
That could be a good idea to write our own tools to do these tasks, in particular for a distributed translation (everybody can help on internet).
problems, ideas, further development
some problems/ideas that may go with the other parts of this project as well:
- The i18n can be put online as a database that everyone can update (thus helping translation in many more languages)
- The main database can be updated as soon as something new for eiffel comes out (by updated here is meant simply adding the new messages, not their translations)
- A 2nd database can be placed on the user's pc and autoupdate eiffel and the additional content one may have when needed (when a new version of Eiffel or a new tool is available for example), with this system one doesn't need to download every time a new file containing some information already downloaded before
- Unicode problem
