Adopting AppData in KDE?

[Richard Hughes]

On 2 November 2013 11:00, Yuri Chornoivan <yurchor at ukr.net> wrote:
> 1. AppData files are tailored for intltool/its-tool processing (tags with underscores). What do you think about adding untranslatable by design appdata files like it was done for Audacity [1]?

Well, this is fine if you speak en_GB or en_US, but that's only a tiny
proportion of the desktop Linux users these days. It's certainly
better than nothing, but if you don't speak English it's not helpful
at all.

> 2. AppData in GNOME packages is filled with translations while compiling/packaging the application. Can it be somehow aligned with KDE idea of storing translations in separate repo?

I'm not sure how KDE does this on a technical level, but I'm sure you
could merge the XML file together somehow if you didn't want the
xml.in intltool method.

> 3. Is it technically possible to have appdata.xml in repo translated by scripty based on KDE desktop- POs (just like KDE .desktop files)?

No clue on this, sorry.

> 4. What is planned to do with Debian/Ubuntu DDTP translations [2, 3]? Is there any plans to adopt it for Canonical Software Centre/Muon with some kind of backend?

No, packages are a different problem to applications. In the case you
have multiple applications shipped in one package you want separate
descriptions, not one description that's a mix of the two. Plus, if we
want non-packaged applications (for instance listaller, glick2 or
click bundles) then the concept of a package description looses all
meaning.

> Is it yet another almost-standard for RPM/GNOME distributions?

There's nothing inherently GNOME or RPM specific about this at all in
my opinion.

Richard.