Intended organization of KDE Frameworks

[Albert Astals Cid]

A Sunday, June 26, 2011, Ingo Klöcker va escriure:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2011, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > A Tuesday, June 07, 2011, Kevin Ottens va escriure:
> > > On Tuesday 7 June 2011 01:26:17 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > > > A Tuesday, June 07, 2011, Kevin Ottens va escriure:
> > > > > Well, obviously a Tier 1 framework would have to use tr()
> > > > > instead of i18n() for its translation needs.
> > > > 
> > > > Are we still going to use .po or you plan on us moving to Qt
> > > > translation files?
> > > 
> > > Well, I honestly don't know what awesome magic you used for
> > > libsolid, so for me it's "the same recipe". Note that it'll happen
> > > mostly for Tier 1 frameworks though.
> > 
> > Unfortunately that is not possible. Right now Solid is translated
> > using .po but that only works in KDE applications because you have a
> > KGlobal+KLocale around that loads .mo files (compiled .po), hijacks
> > Qt calls and maps them to the .mo contents. Without a
> > KGlobal+KLocale around that will not work.
> > 
> > This means that if you want Tier 1 frameworks to be translatable you
> > need either to teach Qt to understand gettext files natively or to
> > make Tier 1 frameworks use pure based Qt/Linguist solutions which
> > does not fit either in what scripty is able to do neither in what
> > our translators are used to.
> 
> AFAICS, Tier 1 frameworks don't provide any UI. IMHO they shouldn't
> provide any user visible texts either. Just like UI this should be
> outsourced to Tier 2 or 3 if necessary at all.

Localization is not only about user visible texts, It is also about kconfig 
having per language keys, it is about kstandarddirs::locate being able to find 
localized icons, etc.

Albert

> 
> 
> Regards,
> Ingo