[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: i18n/l10n summary
From: |
Jean-Christophe Helary |
Subject: |
Re: i18n/l10n summary |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Jul 2017 08:22:07 +0900 |
> On Jun 5, 2017, at 21:55, Jean-Christophe Helary <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
>>> The discussion so far seems to point at modifying 'message' and
>>> the likes so that developers don't have to bother with any l10n
>>> mechanism on their part (besides for writing clean strings).
>
> Just as a reminder, we'll need to update all the texi files so that they
> include:
> @documentlanguage
> @documentencoding
Is it ok to proceed with that ?
Jean-Christophe
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Jean-Christophe Helary, 2017/07/01
- Re: i18n/l10n summary,
Jean-Christophe Helary <=
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Jean-Christophe Helary, 2017/07/22
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/07/22
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Jean-Christophe Helary, 2017/07/22
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/07/22
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Jean-Christophe Helary, 2017/07/22
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/07/23
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Jean-Christophe Helary, 2017/07/23
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/07/24
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Jean-Christophe Helary, 2017/07/24
- Re: i18n/l10n summary, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/07/24