Talk:Localization/Concepts/Transcript: Difference between revisions
(New page: I must say that I prefer this approach to the l20n approach. But one concern. Can we try to avoid the msgstr approach. Yes I know it works but it took a long time to undo _n: and _: from...) |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 08:38, 5 January 2009
I must say that I prefer this approach to the l20n approach. But one concern. Can we try to avoid the msgstr approach. Yes I know it works but it took a long time to undo _n: and _: from KDE3 and it would be nicer if we didn't need to do that. I'd suggest asking the PO developers to actually allow this feature in an extension to the format.
I realise that that might cause problems with editors since they would need to support this, but in the long run I think its a better approach.