Wrapping up about KI18n and UIC

[Stephen Kelly]

Chusslove Illich wrote:

>> [: Aleix Pol :]
>> I have been going through the list looking for what we should we do when
>> it comes to .ui file generation and i18n.
> 
> I am confused by that too. Stephen's projected solution seems to me more
> elegant in principle, but I couldn't quite get if (when) it would be able
> to do all that is necessary.

Right. My solution makes the need for the current macro disappear, AFAICT.

> * Make sure no empty-string calls appear, namely tr2i18n(""),
> tr2i18n("", ""), tr2xi18n(""), tr2xi18n("", "")). I don't know if this
> still needs post-generation search-replace or not.

If such calls are generated by uic, then that is a bug in Qt (which should 
have been reported years ago), and should be fixed in Qt, right?

> * Define TRANSLATION_DOMAIN if requested (for library code). I meant this
> to be an optional argument to the macro, but it could be done on the
> higher level with add_definitions(-DTRANSLATION_DOMAIN=...). No idea which
> is better.

How would anyone know what to define it to? You said before it is not always 
the target name. How would someone know whether to make it the target name 
or not?

> 
> * Select whether strings use ki18n semantic markup or not. I meant this to
> be controlled through an optional flag-type argument to the macro, named
> KUIT. If missing, uic would get -tr tr2i18n, and if present -tr tr2xi18n.

When should semantic markup be used or not? I mean, how would someone using 
the macro know whether to specify that tr2i18n or tr2xi18n should be used?

> I would name the macro ki18n_qt_wrap_ui, because it is essentially a
> wrapper for qt_wrap_ui.

It should be obsoleted with CMAKE_AUTOUIC and a usage requirement instead.

Thanks,

Steve.