Seeking help internationalizing Views (and Panels and maybe other modules for D6)
Okay, so I have this idea for a module that will allow contrib modules to have their objects translated. I just did a scan of the modules available for Drupal 6.x involving translation, and #translateable seems close but not quite what I'm looking for, but it might be possible to turn it into what I'm looking for. Here's what I'm thinking: Many modules work with objects of some sort; particularly my modules. Because of the complexity of my objects, I've gone a long way to disengage them from the form. It is not possible to use duplicate, related objects to do translation, as is often done with nodes, because a view object does a LOT of stuff and it's very important not to have duplicates that try to do the same thing. This is also true of Panels. One thing I can do, is pretty easily identify any string I store as translateable. This is my proposed API: Views loads a view. Upon rendering, if the global $language->language is not the default language, and this module is enabled, Views will call MODULENAME_translate_object('views', 'view', $view->name) and do an inline replacement of all strings on the object itself. Views will also provide a 'translate' link which will lead to a URL provided by this module to translate that view. It may be possible to do some fapi integration with ajax translation but that's a 'bonus' feature. Could be cool, as long as it's not too hard to implement in my already crazy UI. /** * Return an array of translated strings, or NULL if there are no * translated strings for this object. * * @param $module * The name of the module that owns the object. * @param $type * The type of object being translated. Example: 'node', 'view', etc. * @param $id * The unique identifier of the object. May be a string! * @param $language * The language to translate to. If not specified, use the current * langauge from global $language. */ function MODULENAME_translate_object($module, $type, $id, $language) /** * Tell MODULENAME what objects your module has available for * translation. * * @return * An array of object identifiers. Each one must be unique. */ function hook_translateable_objects() { // example return array('view'); } /** * Tell MODULENAME what strings a particular object has available. * Because some objects may be dynamic, this is called for every * unique object id when translation is actively occurring. * * @param $type * The object identifier that corresponds to that used by * hook_translateable objects * @param $id * The unique object ID being translated. * * @return * An array of strings; the key is the string identifier, and * each value is an array that contains the following: * - title: The title of the field. * - description: The description of the field. * - value: The current value of the field. */ function hook_translateable_strings($type, $id) { // example return array('view'); } From the API perspective, that's about all I have to do. I have to do some extra work to make sure each component of the view provides the strings properly, but that's not hard. The translation interface will need to record state information on the strings, so that it can tell the user if the string has changed since the last time it was translated, making it easy to highlight what needs to be updated. It might be nice to provide a way to browse, but I think it's better to let the module provide that and require the module to provide a link to the translator; that's less work for this module and is likely to be much less clumsy. If someone implements this, I promise Views will use it and will use it very quickly. If a module like #translateable wants to use something like this, so much the better; I would really prefer it if an existing translation module can take on these features, so that we get more widespread usage. That said, my belief is that any module that Views uses for translation will see widespread use in the localization community, and thus, if well maintained, will become a de facto standard and we can convince other module developers to use it too. I'm willing to be flexible, too, but Views has special needs; you'll need to cater to it to get this working, and translating Views is a very important thing for a truly multi-lingual site. But also, with this API any of my modules will be easily translateable.
Hi Earl, I'd invite you to take a look at i18nstrings module (Drupal 6) in i18n package, which implementes 'named strings' translation, and some basic object support, http://drupal.org/project/i18n (i18nstrings) tt('views:viewname:title', "String in default language".......) to('views', $view, array('title', 'name', 'footer'....) and also some patches on the issue queue, like this one by Gabor, which implemented full object localization and was proposed for Drupal 6, no luck though, http://drupal.org/node/141461 dt('view', $view) It all is pretty much the same philosophy, using the locale's textgroup support for translation interface, that may have its quirks but allows easy import/export of translations (I.e. export 'views' translations) and a common familiar interface to translate everything, without too much work. Also if you want to allow translations at some point but don't want to do all the work now nor introduce aditional dependencies into views, you can use some t-style wrapper for all the views so other modules (i18nviews would come next :-) ) can implement it. Like views_t($view) before any display operation function views_t(&$view) { if (function_exists('views_t_implementation') { ....... } } Or, alternatively, let me know how could I improve i18nstrings module to meet your requirements. For what I see below we'd be already almost there for views translation. Earl Miles wrote:
Okay, so I have this idea for a module that will allow contrib modules to have their objects translated. I just did a scan of the modules available for Drupal 6.x involving translation, and #translateable seems close but not quite what I'm looking for, but it might be possible to turn it into what I'm looking for. Here's what I'm thinking:
Many modules work with objects of some sort; particularly my modules. Because of the complexity of my objects, I've gone a long way to disengage them from the form. It is not possible to use duplicate, related objects to do translation, as is often done with nodes, because a view object does a LOT of stuff and it's very important not to have duplicates that try to do the same thing. This is also true of Panels.
One thing I can do, is pretty easily identify any string I store as translateable. This is my proposed API:
Views loads a view. Upon rendering, if the global $language->language is not the default language, and this module is enabled, Views will call MODULENAME_translate_object('views', 'view', $view->name) and do an inline replacement of all strings on the object itself. Views will also provide a 'translate' link which will lead to a URL provided by this module to translate that view. It may be possible to do some fapi integration with ajax translation but that's a 'bonus' feature. Could be cool, as long as it's not too hard to implement in my already crazy UI.
/** * Return an array of translated strings, or NULL if there are no * translated strings for this object. * * @param $module * The name of the module that owns the object. * @param $type * The type of object being translated. Example: 'node', 'view', etc. * @param $id * The unique identifier of the object. May be a string! * @param $language * The language to translate to. If not specified, use the current * langauge from global $language. */ function MODULENAME_translate_object($module, $type, $id, $language)
/** * Tell MODULENAME what objects your module has available for * translation. * * @return * An array of object identifiers. Each one must be unique. */ function hook_translateable_objects() { // example return array('view'); }
/** * Tell MODULENAME what strings a particular object has available. * Because some objects may be dynamic, this is called for every * unique object id when translation is actively occurring. * * @param $type * The object identifier that corresponds to that used by * hook_translateable objects * @param $id * The unique object ID being translated. * * @return * An array of strings; the key is the string identifier, and * each value is an array that contains the following: * - title: The title of the field. * - description: The description of the field. * - value: The current value of the field. */ function hook_translateable_strings($type, $id) { // example return array('view'); }
From the API perspective, that's about all I have to do. I have to do some extra work to make sure each component of the view provides the strings properly, but that's not hard.
The translation interface will need to record state information on the strings, so that it can tell the user if the string has changed since the last time it was translated, making it easy to highlight what needs to be updated. It might be nice to provide a way to browse, but I think it's better to let the module provide that and require the module to provide a link to the translator; that's less work for this module and is likely to be much less clumsy.
If someone implements this, I promise Views will use it and will use it very quickly. If a module like #translateable wants to use something like this, so much the better; I would really prefer it if an existing translation module can take on these features, so that we get more widespread usage. That said, my belief is that any module that Views uses for translation will see widespread use in the localization community, and thus, if well maintained, will become a de facto standard and we can convince other module developers to use it too. I'm willing to be flexible, too, but Views has special needs; you'll need to cater to it to get this working, and translating Views is a very important thing for a truly multi-lingual site. But also, with this API any of my modules will be easily translateable.
Jose A. Reyero wrote:
Hi Earl,
I'd invite you to take a look at i18nstrings module (Drupal 6) in i18n package, which implementes 'named strings' translation, and some basic object support, http://drupal.org/project/i18n (i18nstrings) tt('views:viewname:title', "String in default language".......)
I don't like tt() for Views for three reasons. 1) Each call to tt() will cause a database access. For a lot of strings this is unfortunate. This is one reason that the API I outlined has a function that will get all the strings for a given object, which I can then go through in that object. 2) The pluggable nature of Views actually makes me worry that trying to use tt() on strings at render time will cause spotty behavior. Whereas the system declares what its default options are, so in that same function it can also declare which of those options are translatable, and once declared the developer of that particular plugin/style/whatever never has to worry about it again. 3) Because of how Views are stored, I don't want the onus of knowing when a string has changed to be on Views. Gathering a full list of strings for a given object makes, IMO, the management of those strings quite easy and the translation module can compare that list to what it had before and hilight what has changed on that object for the user. Also it makes it much more convenient to translate an entire object at once.
to('views', $view, array('title', 'name', 'footer'....)
This doesn't work for Views; Views objects are not flat, and they can have plugins which come and go which will drastically change which strings are available.
and also some patches on the issue queue, like this one by Gabor, which implemented full object localization and was proposed for Drupal 6, no luck though, http://drupal.org/node/141461 dt('view', $view)
Reading this makes me realize that I left out setting a type on the string, because obviously I'll have some textareas that need to be translated as well, and you'll need to know about that. It does look like there's some definite similarities with that patch to what I propose, but it suffers from the problem I have with to() which that Views objects are not flat AND they are very dynamic, so I need a more fluid way of telling the system what has changed. It's close, though, and I think it could be made to work for me.
Also if you want to allow translations at some point but don't want to do all the work now nor introduce aditional dependencies into views, you can use some t-style wrapper for all the views so other modules (i18nviews would come next :-) ) can implement it.
This solution would work but I'm greedy and I want one solution that will work for all of my modules, and this one means each module would need a companion module. So it does look like, perhaps, modifying the dt() patch to be able to handle the crazy crazy Views objects. By the way, just to give you an idea of what I'm talking about, here is a simplified look at the View object: $view (views_view object) -- displays (array, minimum 1, no maximum) -- display (views_display object) -- options, style_options, row_options (all arrays of data) -- fields/filters/sorts/arguments/relationships (array) -- options (guess what? Can also data) -- can contain further plugins. With options. Like argument validators. As you can see, there's a huge amount of nesting. Every view has at least 1 display but any useful view has 2 and possibly more. I've got real uses for Views with 6 or more displays. I have handler objects that can be used to basically recursively compile all the data, and I think that's important to this design because it will keep translation code, for Views, all in one place. That's one less thing for the developer to have to worry about, and trust me, there's plenty for the developer to worry about when creating this stuff.
Yes I actually share your concerns about queries/performance/full object translation. If you read the story of that 'dt' patch you'll see the same. More comments below. Earl Miles wrote:
Jose A. Reyero wrote:
Hi Earl,
I'd invite you to take a look at i18nstrings module (Drupal 6) in i18n package, which implementes 'named strings' translation, and some basic object support, http://drupal.org/project/i18n (i18nstrings) tt('views:viewname:title', "String in default language".......)
I don't like tt() for Views for three reasons. 1) Each call to tt() will cause a database access. For a lot of strings this is unfortunate. This is one reason that the API I outlined has a function that will get all the strings for a given object, which I can then go through in that object. 2) The pluggable nature of Views actually makes me worry that trying to use tt() on strings at render time will cause spotty behavior. Whereas the system declares what its default options are, so in that same function it can also declare which of those options are translatable, and once declared the developer of that particular plugin/style/whatever never has to worry about it again. 3) Because of how Views are stored, I don't want the onus of knowing when a string has changed to be on Views. Gathering a full list of strings for a given object makes, IMO, the management of those strings quite easy and the translation module can compare that list to what it had before and hilight what has changed on that object for the user. Also it makes it much more convenient to translate an entire object at once.
to('views', $view, array('title', 'name', 'footer'....)
This doesn't work for Views; Views objects are not flat, and they can have plugins which come and go which will drastically change which strings are available. Agreed. This was just an example of similar features already implemented and working so maybe we could build on that.
Also that module has some in progress (not really working yet but coming) support for object prefetching (fetching all 'views:xyz:*' strings with a single query... The issue is actually more complex than that. While for some objects you may want to retrieve all the strings in one hit, for other cases (think of a taxonomy autocomplete with localized terms) we may need to fetch instead all the translations for a bunch of different objects. So I think in principle single string storage, one string per row, is more flexible and may fit all these needs.
and also some patches on the issue queue, like this one by Gabor, which implemented full object localization and was proposed for Drupal 6, no luck though, http://drupal.org/node/141461 dt('view', $view)
Reading this makes me realize that I left out setting a type on the string, because obviously I'll have some textareas that need to be translated as well, and you'll need to know about that. It does look like there's some definite similarities with that patch to what I propose, but it suffers from the problem I have with to() which that Views objects are not flat AND they are very dynamic, so I need a more fluid way of telling the system what has changed. It's close, though, and I think it could be made to work for me.
There was some version of the patch that included also a possible callback function to be defined for given 'text groups' (I'll have to dig in my dev logs...)
Also if you want to allow translations at some point but don't want to do all the work now nor introduce aditional dependencies into views, you can use some t-style wrapper for all the views so other modules (i18nviews would come next :-) ) can implement it.
This solution would work but I'm greedy and I want one solution that will work for all of my modules, and this one means each module would need a companion module.
I'm greedier yet and I want one solution that will work for everybody's modules :-) However I don't think there's anything wrong with an open wrapper that allows any other multilingual solution to plug in there, but better if it's not 'views' specific. See this patch instead, http://drupal.org/node/155047 As a side note, when dealing with multilingual sites (specially for big ones), the main problem for translators is to have one single generic UI and workflow to handle *all* translations, so it's really a major nightmare if every module or group of modules implements its own translation solution. On this sense, all these solutions proposed here have the real advantage of using the same translation UI (locale module with textgroups), which also can handle export/import of single or all text groups, so external tools can be used too.
So it does look like, perhaps, modifying the dt() patch to be able to handle the crazy crazy Views objects. By the way, just to give you an idea of what I'm talking about, here is a simplified look at the View object:
$view (views_view object) -- displays (array, minimum 1, no maximum) -- display (views_display object) -- options, style_options, row_options (all arrays of data) -- fields/filters/sorts/arguments/relationships (array) -- options (guess what? Can also data) -- can contain further plugins. With options. Like argument validators.
As you can see, there's a huge amount of nesting. Every view has at least 1 display but any useful view has 2 and possibly more. I've got real uses for Views with 6 or more displays. I have handler objects that can be used to basically recursively compile all the data, and I think that's important to this design because it will keep translation code, for Views, all in one place. That's one less thing for the developer to have to worry about, and trust me, there's plenty for the developer to worry about when creating this stuff.
I guess if you have such 'evil' recursive handler objects ;-) we'd need recursive translation handlers too. But also, you know many other people may build on your views module and add even more stuff in there. That's why I'd leave the door open for translation callbacks that can be implemented by other modules. About the translation UI you may think also of a specially suited one for views, but as I mention above the problem most usually is to have a generic one for all translations. Also to keep in mind, translators are not necessarily tech savvy people so any UI needing admin access to translate strings has some fundamental problem. However, we can also build an object UI on top of the single strings one (So the single site-admin-developer-I-just-want-my-site-in-two-languages is happy too) So I'd really be happy if we could find any good solution that would work for all modules. I'd be happier yet if you just provided one I could reuse for i18n so I could drop that i18nstrings module :-) Btw, there are modules in that package -like i18nstrings- that are spinoff candidates so they can be reused by other modules without needing the whole i18n stuff. I'm just figuring out how to make it best. So if you thought we can build on that for some better solution I'd be happy to create a new project for it and add your name to the list. Whatever I'm glad you've brought up this issue in the list because we badly need some good solution for Drupal 7 string translation and if we can have one that is shared and tested by many Drupal 6 modules we may be almost there for the next version.. (Btw, developers still wanted to build *the complete multilingual solution* for Drupal 7) Cheers, Jose
Jose A. Reyero wrote:
Yes I actually share your concerns about queries/performance/full object translation. If you read the story of that 'dt' patch you'll see the same.
Yea, I read the dt() patch after I wrote that part. It definitely addressed the performance issues there and they are what I brought up and much more.
I guess if you have such 'evil' recursive handler objects ;-) we'd need recursive translation handlers too. But also, you know many other people may build on your views module and add even more stuff in there. That's why I'd leave the door open for translation callbacks that can be implemented by other modules.
Well, my hope would be that the onus for understanding the depth would be on me. With the API I specced out, I just provide you a list of strings when you ask for it. The issue is, you can't assume that the list of strings you asked for yesterday will be the same list of strings you asked for today. One of the reasons that my API has a string identifier plus a textual label is that 'viewname/displayname/field/fieldtype/option/separator' isn't going to mean much to the user, but I can translate that into a string which, at least in English, will mean something, but also that stuff can all be run through t(). And the idea of organizing the strings is that you *can* group them all together, so the textgroup concept, at least, works; I'm not sure about the mechanism itself as I'm not familiar with it. As long as it can handle strings coming and going arbitrarily then it should work fine.
About the translation UI you may think also of a specially suited one for views, but as I mention above the problem most usually is to have a generic one for all translations. Also to keep in mind, translators are not necessarily tech savvy people so any UI needing admin access to translate strings has some fundamental problem. However, we can also build an object UI on top of the single strings one (So the single site-admin-developer-I-just-want-my-site-in-two-languages is happy too)
It's not so much that this is specially suited for Views so much as I'm trying to set up something that works for lots and lots of things and is able to take into account the flexibility needed. The translator shouldn't actually see what's going on; but instead be presented with a list of all current, known translatable strings for a given object, and highlights for which of them have changed since last time.
About the translation UI you may think also of a specially suited one for views, but as I mention above the problem most usually is to have a generic one for all translations. Also to keep in mind, translators are not necessarily tech savvy people so any UI needing admin access to translate strings has some fundamental problem. However, we can also build an object UI on top of the single strings one (So the single site-admin-developer-I-just-want-my-site-in-two-languages is happy too)
It's not so much that this is specially suited for Views so much as I'm trying to set up something that works for lots and lots of things and is able to take into account the flexibility needed. The translator shouldn't actually see what's going on; but instead be presented with a list of all current, known translatable strings for a given object, and highlights for which of them have changed since last time.
I have to disagree here. Most of the translators I had to deal with in the past always asked first: "What's the context?" or "Where does this appear?" Locale's/Translation's interface for adding/editing translations is currently built for developers/advanced Drupal users, not translators. Developers speak programming languages. I guess only a minority of developers can speak additional languages and have also skills of real translators. To translate a content correctly, translators are more comfortable with the approach taken by #translatable. They see the original form and thus, have an idea of how all strings and contents of an object relate. #translatable stores the translations and does not alter the original data.
Daniel F. Kudwien wrote:
To translate a content correctly, translators are more comfortable with the approach taken by #translatable. They see the original form and thus, have an idea of how all strings and contents of an object relate. #translatable stores the translations and does not alter the original data.
That's fine and true when it's 1 form, 1 object, but a single view is at least 50 forms, most of them with no more than an item or two. Is that *really* the translation interface you want? The label I provide can lead you to the context, but without promoting stuff to a single level, I don't think translating a view directly in the form would be considered good UI.
Daniel F. Kudwien wrote:
About the translation UI you may think also of a specially
suited one
for views, but as I mention above the problem most usually
is to have
a generic one for all translations. Also to keep in mind,
translators
are not necessarily tech savvy people so any UI needing
admin access
to translate strings has some fundamental problem. However, we can also build an object UI on top of the single strings one (So the single site-admin-developer-I-just-want-my-site-in-two-languages is happy too)
It's not so much that this is specially suited for Views so much as I'm trying to set up something that works for lots and lots of things and is able to take into account the flexibility needed. The translator shouldn't actually see what's going on; but instead be presented with a list of all current, known translatable strings for a given object, and highlights for which of them have changed since last time.
I have to disagree here. Most of the translators I had to deal with in the past always asked first: "What's the context?" or "Where does this appear?" Locale's/Translation's interface for adding/editing translations is currently built for developers/advanced Drupal users, not translators. Developers speak programming languages. I guess only a minority of developers can speak additional languages and have also skills of real translators.
To translate a content correctly, translators are more comfortable with the approach taken by #translatable. They see the original form and thus, have an idea of how all strings and contents of an object relate. #translatable stores the translations and does not alter the original data.
I think: yes and no. Sure people wants to see the context. The context though, for a non tech user is a web page on your site and that's it. See string on (page) context ---> Translate string (If using l10n client, can be done on the same page) As oppossed to See the string on the site ---> Si what is it? Is it a view? ---> So which view is it? ( Find view) --> Find string on view -- > (Oh, fuck, not here, it was not a view) --> Ask the admin ---> --> So the admin says it is a block. ---> Wtf is a block? -->...... ...
On Saturday, 26. April 2008, Jose A. Reyero wrote:
Daniel F. Kudwien wrote:
To translate a content correctly, translators are more comfortable with the approach taken by #translatable. They see the original form and thus, have an idea of how all strings and contents of an object relate. #translatable stores the translations and does not alter the original data.
I think: yes and no. [snip]
KDE's i18n() function (same as t() for Drupal) has an optional "context" parameter that the developer specifies in order to help the translators out. (That context later appears as comment in the .pot file, I believe.) Maybe it would be an option to include something like this in some way, in order to provide an actual middle ground between "no UI-related context in the .pot file" and "no code-related context in the UI string".
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jakob Petsovits schrieb:
On Saturday, 26. April 2008, Jose A. Reyero wrote:
Daniel F. Kudwien wrote:
To translate a content correctly, translators are more comfortable with the approach taken by #translatable. They see the original form and thus, have an idea of how all strings and contents of an object relate. #translatable stores the translations and does not alter the original data. I think: yes and no. [snip]
KDE's i18n() function (same as t() for Drupal) has an optional "context" parameter that the developer specifies in order to help the translators out. (That context later appears as comment in the .pot file, I believe.)
Maybe it would be an option to include something like this in some way, in order to provide an actual middle ground between "no UI-related context in the .pot file" and "no code-related context in the UI string".
Drupal already does something similar if you do not use pre-built PO files. The PO comments are filled with the URLs of the places the string was encountered first. Not perfect of course, but maybe someting to build on. Cheers, Gerhard -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIFIWifg6TFvELooQRApykAKCWBsOIGGTNAvgpV9Ep22VB1a2yDACfXJux Vs2AwQwhF6jOvEhe7U6ZRQo= =h9V6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Gerhard Killesreiter schrieb:
KDE's i18n() function (same as t() for Drupal) has an optional "context" parameter that the developer specifies in order to help the translators out. (That context later appears as comment in the .pot file, I believe.)
Maybe it would be an option to include something like this in some way, in order to provide an actual middle ground between "no UI-related context in the .pot file" and "no code-related context in the UI string".
Drupal already does something similar if you do not use pre-built PO files. The PO comments are filled with the URLs of the places the string was encountered first. Not perfect of course, but maybe someting to build on.
I am using a very simple i18n-System in an application, where the argument to translate() is not an english text, but a text token. The token is itself text an it can contain context. I did that not only for easing translation but for creating "namespaces" for text. In most application including drupal one word might sometimes be translated diffent depending on the context. A simple example is the german word "Himmel", which can be translated to "sky" as well as "heaven", depending on context. So the tokens could look like this: "ADMINISTRATION_SITE_BUILDING_MODULE_CONFIGURATION_MENU_ITEM_CAPTION". If you define a token naming policy carefully, the translator knows the context just by looking at the token (Thats the caption of the menu item pointing to the module configuration section.). With this translate-function, every string in every language must be contained in a translation file, which could be considered flexible. HTH, Eric
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought we were discussing translation of user generated contents, not fixed UI strings. By speaking of context, I meant the context in hierarchically structured objects; in the given use-case - Views. Small addition to the approach taken by #translatable: Since translation forms *are* the original forms, this system is able to provide the correct UI for each translatable content (string/option/file/etc.) without the need to re-define how a translation form for a certain object needs to be built. IMHO, this is the key for a translation system that needs to be as flexible and modular as Drupal is.
-----Original Message----- From: development-bounces@drupal.org [mailto:development-bounces@drupal.org] On Behalf Of Eric-Alexander Schaefer Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 4:23 PM To: development@drupal.org Subject: Re: [development] Seeking help internationalizing Views (and Panels and maybe other modules for D6)
Gerhard Killesreiter schrieb:
KDE's i18n() function (same as t() for Drupal) has an optional "context" parameter that the developer specifies in order to help the translators out. (That context later appears as comment in the .pot file, I believe.)
Maybe it would be an option to include something like this in some way, in order to provide an actual middle ground between "no UI-related context in the .pot file" and "no code-related context in the UI string".
Drupal already does something similar if you do not use pre-built PO files. The PO comments are filled with the URLs of the places the string was encountered first. Not perfect of course, but maybe someting to build on.
I am using a very simple i18n-System in an application, where the argument to translate() is not an english text, but a text token. The token is itself text an it can contain context. I did that not only for easing translation but for creating "namespaces" for text. In most application including drupal one word might sometimes be translated diffent depending on the context. A simple example is the german word "Himmel", which can be translated to "sky" as well as "heaven", depending on context. So the tokens could look like this: "ADMINISTRATION_SITE_BUILDING_MODULE_CONFIGURATION_MENU_ITEM_CAPTION". If you define a token naming policy carefully, the translator knows the context just by looking at the token (Thats the caption of the menu item pointing to the module configuration section.). With this translate-function, every string in every language must be contained in a translation file, which could be considered flexible.
HTH, Eric
participants (6)
-
Daniel F. Kudwien -
Earl Miles -
Eric-Alexander Schaefer -
Gerhard Killesreiter -
Jakob Petsovits -
Jose A. Reyero