|
|
Gil,
Well, XML is an industry standard :)
I think that we should explain better:
· The shortcomings of the current Openbravo XML format. Which fields are we currently missing and how we will use them if present. Please, put an example of each shortcoming.
· How XLIFF solves these shortcomings
· The benefits of XLIFF compared to our current format
Thanks Gil, this feedback is very useful.
Jordi, |
|
|
|
== The major shortcomings are: ==
- There is only a flag per <row> instead of a flag per <value>:
Example:
<row id="1005800001" trl="Y">
<value column="Name" original="Heartbeat">Heartbeat</value>
<value column="Description" original="Heartbeat pop-up window">Heartbeat pop-up window</value>
</row>
With this, both <value column="Name"> and <value column="Description"> are assumed as being translated. For column="Name" is fine, but not for column="Description"
This is somewhat fixed in openbravo2po-valuetrl[1] but it has some major bugs[2].
- Is an error prone format:
Since it was designed in the Compiere times there isn't an easy way to mark a translation as "To be reviewed".
There is not an easy way to pre-fill a translation based on a translation memory.
There is not an easy way to use a glossary for consistent translations.
- There is no easy way to use and reuse translation memories:
You are forced to translate a plain xml file, which is a pain, or convert to po files which are ok, but it is not an industry standard and has lots of shortcomings (strings status, translation memory, glossary ...).
- There are few capable editors:
Mostly lokalize (former kbabel), gtranslator (which is expected to have a 2.0 release soon) and some on-line translation tools.
== How XLIFF solves these shortcomings ==
XLIFF is a file format designed for translation management, with TMX [3] (translation memory) and TBX [4] (terminology) any professional translator, or an enthusiast translator, doesn't need anything more.
All matches (strings that are the same in different files) will be translated once, hence, the translation process will be less tedious and the overall translation will be a lot more coherent since all matches will be translated equally, leaving the choice to translate one different if needed (if "make" for example is a verb or a noun it can be translated different in some languages).
There are lots of translator editors, from command-line, typical GUI desktop tools and on-line translation systems that can handle XLIFF files.
== The benefits of XLIFF compared to our current format ==
The major benefit is that with tools (see Programs section below) like Pootle everything tried to achieve with Openbravo2PO, translations.openbravo.com and more tools that should be build can be done with a single instance of Pootle. The workflow would be less painful if Openbravo ERP outputs its translations as XLIFF since no file format converters will be used (= less chances to mess something). Major programs such as OpenOffice.org or Mozilla are using Pootle for their translation workflow. Even it could be added as a plugin in the Forge and allow project admins to mark their projects as translatable!
The Pootle approach doesn't means that everyone is forced to translate with Pootle, you can download up-to-date XLIFF files from Pootle and translate them with your preferred tool (see Programs section below).
Obviously we aren't forced to even use Pootle and fix translations.openbravo.com to handle xliff files to display statistics and provide up-to-date XLIFF files.
translations.openbravo.com should have been a couple of months of defining the uses, coding, reviewing and releasing if we had been using XLIFF. Since it was not the case Phil, had to work (a lot) on improving Openbravo2PO for the new requirements. If we had been using XLIFF by those days, the process would not had expanded for so long since all the needed tools (updating xliff files, calculating their statistics...) were already done and they are used by several projects and thus are usable (i.e. no bugs or major blockers for our needs).
== Programs ==
Open Language tools (Utilities and editor):
https://open-language-tools.dev.java.net/ [^]
Translate toolkit (Converters and utilities):
http://translate.sourceforge.net/wiki/ [^]
Pootle (On-line translation tool):
http://translate.sourceforge.net/wiki/ [^]
Xliff-tools
http://xliff-tools.freedesktop.org/wiki/ [^]
Sowrdfish (XLIFF translator):
http://www.maxprograms.com/ [^]
Stingray (TMX editor):
http://www.maxprograms.com/ [^]
Xlfedit (XLIFF editor):
http://www.heartsome.net/ [^]
There are even more, some of them just professional and paid only tools, obviously oriented ad translation companies that do wonders with XLIFF, TMX and TBX.
== Major XLIFF supporters (companies and other associations) ==
AOL
Adobe
HP
Hitachi
IBM
Lionbridge[*,+]
Localisation Research Centre[*]
Novell
Oracle
Red Hat
SAP AG :)
SDL International[*,+]
Sun
US Department of Defense
University of California, Berkeley
[*] Localisation firms
[+] Major translation companies, see:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionbridge [^]
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SDL_International [^]
Source: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ballot.php?id=1408 [^]
== References ==
[1] https://dev.openbravo.com/websvn/localization/tools/openbravo2po/branches/openbravo2po-valuetrl/ [^]
[2] https://issues.openbravo.com/search.php?project_id=11&category=openbravo2po&reporter_id=-1&sticky_issues=on&sortby=last_updated&dir=DESC&hide_status_id=90 [^]
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translation_Memory_eXchange [^]
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tbx#TBX [^] |
|