From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0C81B8C02 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2023 12:22:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BBC95376 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2023 12:22:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2023 12:22:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7E28740E6D for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2023 12:22:24 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2023 12:22:23 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US To: Fiona Ebner , Proxmox VE development discussion , Maximiliano Sandoval References: <20231129132117.217210-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com> <50f3e171-c2b4-4e59-bd7f-07f81b11c0b7@proxmox.com> <97caa32b-eb4d-434e-965c-b65d51761a41@proxmox.com> <2b8569d7-b774-457b-8eab-134392f3cc4c@proxmox.com> From: Dominik Csapak In-Reply-To: <2b8569d7-b774-457b-8eab-134392f3cc4c@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.018 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH widget-toolkit] i18n: mark strings as translatable X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2023 11:22:55 -0000 On 12/6/23 12:20, Fiona Ebner wrote: > Am 06.12.23 um 12:00 schrieb Dominik Csapak: >> On 12/6/23 11:21, Maximiliano Sandoval wrote: >>> >>> Dominik Csapak writes: >>> >>>> translating ACME does not make sense to me since it's >>>> the name of the protocol and stands for >>>>   Automatic Certificate Management Environment >>>> >>>> i don't think/believe this should be translated >>>> into other languages as a standalone word >>> >>> "ACME" appears in four translatable strings, e.g. >>> >>>      msgid "ACME Accounts" >> >> which makes sense since 'accounts' must be translated >> >>> >>> Having the term itself being translatable allows the translator to be >>> consistent on which term to use when there are multiple translatable >>> strings containing it. It would be confusing for the user if the only >>> place where they see "ACME" is in the original string. >> >> but that does not change whether ACME is translatable or not. >> In one case we  just 'force' the translator to use it like we intended >> >> the translator must make sure the terms are consistent anyway... >> > > We could switch to template strings to actively prevent ACME from being > translated in such instances, i.e. "{0} Accounts". Note that this does > not take away much flexibility from the translator, because the position > of {0} is not fixed in the translation ;) while i agree with the sentiment, this is not always a good idea. in some languages the word would change depending on what '{0}' is in these situations i think having more context would be better when translating