6 replies to this topic

[iann]

Another question that is probably really obvious, but is it necessary or helpful to have duplicated translations in cases where there are multiple language codes that mean the same thing. Is one always obsolete? Would a user with an obsolete locale (eg ro-RO) and no translation always fall back to the equivalent provided translation (eg ro)?

[Lakrits]

Another question that is probably really obvious, but is it necessary or helpful to have duplicated translations in cases where there are multiple language codes that mean the same thing. Is one always obsolete? Would a user with an obsolete locale (eg ro-RO) and no translation always fall back to the equivalent provided translation (eg ro)?

1. It doesn't matter if the question is obvious or not. If you wonder over something, it's always right to ask!

2. No, you don't need two locales for the same language region if there are no significant lingual differences. Mozilla tries to switch to two character language codes where applicable instead of the old designations that also included a regional code. For e.g. Romanian, Mozilla now uses ro instead of ro-RO. We use Mozilla's list of official locales as a guide for which locales to use here at BabelZilla, you can find it here: Mozilla Web localization Dashboard.

However, if the obsolete locale is further translated than the new one, you might want to check with the translator(s) if they want to merge the locales before you delete it.

/Lakrits

[DaveG]

When looking for a matching localization the application will try to get the exact code it wants but will generally be set to fallback to the best match available.

Also, even if you did for some reason need to include duplicate locales you wouldn't want to actually duplicate the files; just double-map it in the chrome.manifest.

[iann]

Perfect! I'll ditch the duplicate files. I never thought of the double-mapping, that's a great idea.

[DaveG]

Perfect! I'll ditch the duplicate files. I never thought of the double-mapping, that's a great idea.

As I said though, you shouldn't need it. Just stick to the codes Mozilla uses and things should work fine.

I switched wholesale to the simpler codes a while back with Flagfox and haven't had any people reporting problems.

[ultravioletu]

2. No, you don't need two locales for the same language region if there are no significant lingual differences. Mozilla tries to switch to two character language codes where applicable instead of the old designations that also included a regional code. For e.g. Romanian, Mozilla now uses ro instead of ro-RO. We use Mozilla's list of official locales as a guide for which locales to use here at BabelZilla, you can find it here: Mozilla Web localization Dashboard.
/Lakrits

Hello Lakris,

I am registered translator for romanan locales of Adblock Plus. Wladimir, the author of the extension, switched the romanian locale so that it follows the Mozilla behaviour. Since quite a few weeks, I cannot access the localization, though - in my profile I can only choose "ro-RO" as "my language", and apparently if these values mismatch, I am completely denied the access to the entension locales.

Can someone make the check more tolerant to such occurences?

Regards,
/uv

[Lakrits]

Hello Lakris,

I am registered translator for romanan locales of Adblock Plus. Wladimir, the author of the extension, switched the romanian locale so that it follows the Mozilla behaviour. Since quite a few weeks, I cannot access the localization, though - in my profile I can only choose "ro-RO" as "my language", and apparently if these values mismatch, I am completely denied the access to the entension locales.

Can someone make the check more tolerant to such occurences?

Regards,
/uv

Hi,

I've answered ultravioletu in more detail in a PM, but here's the short answer :

To see translations of a specific locale (if you translate into more than one locale), go to the

BabelZilla main page > Web Translation System in the left panel > My translations tab > sort by the Lang. column

Voilà

Lakrits