Re: Localized org-mode

[Jean-Christophe Helary <brandelune@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1884 bytes --]



> On May 9, 2018, at 21:07, Kaushal Modi <kaushal.modi@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> On Wed, May 9, 2018, 8:01 AM Diego Zamboni <diego@zzamboni.org <mailto:diego@zzamboni.org>> wrote:
> I really don't see the point of trying to localize org keywords. To me, they are like the keywords in any programming language - part of the language. Would you consider translating C or LISP keywords?

There are no practical reasons why that should not be possible. The current state of affairs is only due to design constraints when the languages were conceived.

In Scheme, for ex. you can actually redefine all the language keywords very easily without any impact on the interpreter.

> In addition to the trouble of supporting something like this within Emacs, think of the growing ecosystem of tools which support org mode - they would all need to be aware of these localizations. It would be a nightmare to maintain.

Localization, when properly done is never a nightmare to maintain.

> So much +1 on that! Supporting multi-language keywords will make it difficult for 3rd party Org parsers to adopt them too, resulting in even lesser Org adoption.

Genuine question: how many 3rd party tools do support the org format ?

> I like Nicolas' idea where display properties are used to replace the English keywords with the translation; that way the actual Org source remains untouched. 

What matters is that users find org easy to use in their language. But emacs (the main org user) is so far behind in that respect compared to the rest of the FLOSS ecosystem that even having one mode that implements some sort of l10n would be huge. Although, it would be nice to have that work nicely with already existing l10n processes. 


Jean-Christophe Helary
-----------------------------------------------
http://mac4translators.blogspot.com @brandelune



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4204 bytes --]