From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Aug 26 10:44:56 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA10509 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:44:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gershwin.tera.com (gershwin.tera.com [207.224.230.28]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA10458; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:44:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kline@tao.thought.org) Received: from tao.thought.org (tao.tera.com [207.108.223.55]) by gershwin.tera.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA20129; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from kline@localhost) by tao.thought.org (8.8.8/8.7.3) id KAA18134; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:43:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Kline Message-Id: <199808261743.KAA18134@tao.thought.org> Subject: Re: Almost Back... In-Reply-To: <199808261609.RAA03640@bsd.synx.com> from Remy NONNENMACHER at "Aug 26, 98 06:09:23 pm" To: remy@synx.com Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:43:28 -0700 (PDT) Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG (FreeBSD Ports), hackers@FreeBSD.ORG (Hackers Mailing List), Pierre.David@prism.uvsq.fr Organization: <> thought.org: public access uNix in service... <> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG According to Remy NONNENMACHER: > On 26 Aug, Gary Kline wrote: > > According to Remy NONNENMACHER: > >> On 25 Aug, Gary Kline wrote: > >> >.... Remy, I am copiying the -ports and -hackers lists and Pierre David who helped with the initial translations into French. I'd like whatever comments there are on the colon-spacing issues here. [[ ... ]] > > Here is the message file from usr.bin/cmp. You can ignore > > number 2. In French, 2 translates to ``2 cmp : %s : %s\n'' > > because of their grammar requiring whitespace after the > > colon. > > > This is arguable !!. Imagine something like using a cut -f or an awk > with a specific $N. This will cause the script to stop working (and > will be hard to fix). > > Also, old rules about placing the colons and semi-colons are deprecating > in favor of a unique ponctuation without blank. > > I Urge you (AFAIAC) not to change order nor number of 'fields' output. > The #2 message below only happens in ^error(filename) which does an error exit(). But your point is well taken for most if not all output strings:: it might break scripts and cause unnecessary grief. I can see the English to French translation of ``usage:'' to ``utilisation :'' perhaps. Or in usage strings in #3, #4, and #5 below. Places where it would not break any scripts. What do others think? This can be done either way; the important thing, I think, is to do it correctly. > > > > $ > > $ > > $ $Id: cmp.msg,v 1.1 1998/08/26 14:04:13 kline Exp kline $ > > $ > > $set 1 > > $quote " > > 1 "%s %s differ: char %ld, line %ld\n" > 1 "%s %s diffèrent: caractère %ld, ligne %ld\n" > > 2 "cmp: %s: %s\n" > 2 "cmp: %s: %s\n" > > 3 "cmp: EOF on %s\n" > 3 "cmp: EOF sur %s\n" > 3 "cmp: Fin-de-fichier sur %s\n" > 3 "cmp: FDF sur %s\n" My inclination is to go with ``fin-de-fichier'' to get away from a little of the Unix terseness in the French version. I wouldn't care for EOF to be rewritten ``end-of-file'' only because I'm so used to it. Comments?? > > 4 "cmp: only one of -l and -s may be specified.\n" > 4 "cmp: les options -l et -s sont exclusives l'une de l'autre.\n" > 4 "cmp: -l et -s ne peuvent ^etre employés simultanément" Comments? (Mine only upon request :) > (Note: ^e = ISO-8859-1 #EA) > > 5 "cmp: standard input may only be specified once.\n" > 5 "cmp: l'entrée standard ne peut ^etre spécifiée qu'une seule fois.\n" > > 6 "usage: cmp [-l|s] file1 file2 [skip1] [skip2]\n" > 6 "utilisation: cmp [-l|s] fichier1 fichier2 [saut1] [saut2]\n" > > > > > > gary > > > > PS: I'd like to set up a review group in each language > > in case there are disagreements on specific wordings. > > My bias is to aim toward clarity rather than brevity or > > literalness. > > > > I agree: it's *IMPERATIV*; Multiple translators would produce different > terms for one word depending on context. To avoid the multiplication of > expressions, it's necessary to setup a short word to expression > dictionnary that all translators would agree on and apply. Yes:: dictionary! I've used to German variants for ``usage'' and this needs to be resolved; having an expression-dictionary that was agreeable to the majority would have obviated this problem. > [[ ... ]] A public thanks to everyone who has answered. To answer one thing that I didn't make explicit, this internationalization effort very much welcomes _every_ language. If you can create a .msg file for your language, I'll include it in the /nls//.msg directory. gary > -- Gary D. Kline kline@tao.thought.org Public service uNix To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message