Re[3]: [PEAR-DEV] Translation2 ...

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:24:48 +0100, Nicolas Hoizey wrote: >>> 1. String retrival process >>> -------------------------- >>> When I set a pageId and try to get a value for a key that is >>> not defined with that pageId but is defined with a NULL pageId, >>> I think Translation2 should return that value instead of the >>> general fallback string. >> >> there's a subtle syntax difference here, as explained in the >> "HANDLE CONFLICTS" section of the example. >> >> ============================ >> //call #1 >> $tr->get('conflicting')); //pageID defaults to null => get >> current pageID >> //call #2 >> $tr->get('conflicting', '')); //pageID='' => get >> strings with >> no pageID (i.e. the one with a "NULL" in the pageID field >> //call #3 >> $tr->get('conflicting', 'in_page')); // => force pageID >> ============================ >> >> what you want is #2, I guess... > > No, that's not what I want. I have set a pageId in the beginning of > the script, and I just call the get() method with its first > parameter where I need it. > > What I want seems then to be #1, but with a different fallback > method. > > Your method is the following: > 1. pageId parameter is null, so you get current pageId. > 2. there is no string for current pageId, so you get global > fallback string. > > The method I would like to have is: > 1. pageId parameter is null, so you get current pageId. > 2. there is no string for current pageId, so you try with no > pageId. 3. there is no string either for no pageId, so you get > global fallback string. I see. Anyway, if I manage to build what I have in mind, everything will be customizable. >>> 2. Language parameters >>> ---------------------- >> Right now, you can serialize your extra fields and put the >> serialized value in the meta field. > > Why not just use as many fields as wanted? because I haven't thought about that yet! :-) >>> 3. Fallback languages >>> --------------------- >>> It should be possible to use lists of fallback languages >>> instead of just one, with fallback mechanism in the order of >>> the list. [...] >> >> I think that having a fallback language is *really* useful, [...] >> OTOH, having more than one could led to serious performance >> issues. > > Maybe, yes. without the "maybe", trust me :) >> thanks for your feedback > > I use it, so I give feedback... ;) so I hope to hear you again, then! Best regards, Lorenzo