From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: More message encoding woes |
Date: | 2009-03-31 19:39:08 |
Message-ID: | 4989.1238528348@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> I'm leaning towards the idea of trying out all the spellings of the
> database encoding we have in encoding_match_list. That gives the best
> user experience, as it just works, and it doesn't seem that complicated.
How were you going to check --- use that idea of translating a string
that's known to have a translation? OK, but you'd better document
somewhere where translators will read it "you must translate this string
first of all". Maybe use a special string "Translate Me First" that
doesn't actually need to be end-user-visible, just so no one sweats over
getting it right in context. (I can see "syntax error" being
problematic in some translations, since translators will know it is
always just a fragment of a larger message ...)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2009-03-31 19:41:37 | time to upgrade stemmers ? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-31 19:27:38 | Re: [GENERAL] pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage? |