3 ms·
As someone who has dealt with localization pipelines before, I totally agree with your sentiment. People doing translation work should not need to deal with cod
by slaymaker1907 4y ago
As someone who has dealt with localization pipelines before, I totally agree with your sentiment. People doing translation work should not need to deal with code. I like that you opted for translation IDs, though that can get messy switching back and forth to know what the English (or whatever the base language is) actually says. The IDs are somewhat worth it though since you can try and use old translation files unlike the gettext methodology which looks for 1-1 string matches.
- samuelstros 4y agoIDs vs base language string as ID is a common debate. I opted for translation IDs since Mozilla's Fluent (https://projectfluent.org/ https://projectfluent.org/) uses translation IDs. I can't find their list of reasons. I do remember having problems myself by changing the base language string and thereby losing the connection to all translations. The argument against IDs is the reduced readability. Something that can be solved with the IDE extension. Is there something else that bothers you in localization pipelines?