Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> I'm leaning towards the idea of trying out all the spellings of the
>> database encoding we have in encoding_match_list. That gives the best
>> user experience, as it just works, and it doesn't seem that complicated.
> How were you going to check --- use that idea of translating a string
> that's known to have a translation? OK, but you'd better document
> somewhere where translators will read it "you must translate this string
> first of all". Maybe use a special string "Translate Me First" that
> doesn't actually need to be end-user-visible, just so no one sweats over
> getting it right in context.
Yep, something like that. There seems to be a magic empty string
translation at the beginning of every po file that returns the
meta-information about the translation, like translation author and
date. Assuming that works reliably, I'll use that.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-03-31 19:59:24|
|Subject: Re: More message encoding woes |
|Previous:||From: Euler Taveira de Oliveira||Date: 2009-03-31 19:46:23|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement (and document, and test) has_sequence_privilege()|