>>>> "Ben" == Ben Wing <ben(a)666.com>
Ben> Thankfully, nearly all of this horridity you bring up is
I don't think so. The GNU Translation Project has worked very hard
to bring GNU gettext() to the state it is in; do you think they would
have settled for something as weak as it is if dealing with the
"horridity" was easy or irrelevant?
Ben> In XEmacs, "gettext" does not refer to any standard API, but
Ben> is merely a stand-in for a translation routine (presumably
Ben> written by us).
Oh. Bad naming, then.
Ben> We may as well call it something else.
Ben> We define our own concept of "current language". We also
Ben> allow for a function that needs a different version for each
Ben> language, which handles all cases where simple translation
Ben> isn't sufficient, e.g. when you have to pluralize some noun
Ben> given to you or insert the correct form of the definite
Ben> article. No weird hacks needed. No interaction problems
Ben> with other pieces of software.
The interaction problems I'm worried about are all within XEmacs.
Whether "what you wrote awhile ago" is sufficient I will wait until I
see it to judge.
Ben> "There you go again" is usually not true; most of what I
Ben> quote was indeed put out publicly at some point, but I'll try
Ben> to be more explicit about this in the future.
Ben, you asked a question about how to merge agendas; "publically at
some point [implicitly, in bits and pieces]" is not an agenda.
If XEmacs Beta is not going to be the channel for design discussions,
especially at that level, then a public one, perhaps moderated/write-
restricted if you must, should be opened up.
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
_________________ _________________ _________________ _________________
What are those straight lines for? "XEmacs rules."