Re: Re: phpdoc /fr bookinfo.xml

eschmid+sic@s.netic.de wrote: > On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 11:39:53AM +0200, Thomas wrote: > > eschmid+sic@s.netic.de wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 10:46:25AM +0200, Thomas wrote: > > > > Hojtsy gábor wrote: > > > > > > > > >>I too think that this is not needed for translations. I can't > > > > > >>think > > > > > of > > > > > >>any situation where I would use this. An En-version comment > > > > > >>will be at least usable :)) > > > > > >Whenever I find out a partally translated file, I know at once > > > > > >which version is was started from, without diff or reading the > > > > > >whole file. > > > > > > > > > > You will now which French version it was. Where it helps you? > > > > > > > > You're right. I use a tag like (proposed by Jeroen I think) > > > > <!-- up-to-date against phpdoc/en/chapters/security.xml:1.23 --> > > > > > > > > As soon as I have enough files with this tag, I'll write a simple script > > > > > > > > which shows me the priority (which file is farest behind) of "my" > > > > files. > > > > > > > > The more users in our language follow this, the more useful it will be > > > > (but having a system and a common "living" it are different things :). > > > > > > I think it is useless. If someone translate a file, he or she should look > > > for chances in the English cvs.php.net tree. > > > > this is in fact an "automated look into the en-cvs-tree" for more than just > > one file. > > For the other languages it is useless, because we have to look into more > revisions besides the last en revision. Most translated files are one or > two years old. Yes, exactly the changes from the one year old en-version to the actual en-version. But I hope that you don't insinuate all the other tranlators the behavior like some of the German ones :) --Tom