[Mono-list] ECMA compliance

[Serge]

I'd suggest to check out the NDoc tool (http://ndoc.sourceforge.net)
It's a great tool and has nice integration with NAnt. It would be nice to
maintain the ability to process Mono's docs with NDoc.

Also I don't understand one point.
If we're going to use some GUI tool to facilitate translation, what's the
difference between embedding (English) comments and keeping them in the
separate file.
I mean, suppose we have XML file with the comments extracted from the
library code and one or several files with translations. It's exceptionally
easy for that tool to "merge" both behind the scenes - I mean what's the
difference between splitted out docs and such automated merging.

> GNOME comes with Ukranian translations ;-)
Sure, but there are some funny things I really-really can't explain ;-)
(And, I guess there are more people who speak Ukrainian in Canada than in
the Ukraine :-)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel de Icaza" <miguel@ximian.com>
To: "Sergey Chaban" <serge@wildwestsoftware.com>
Cc: <mono-list@ximian.com>
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Mono-list] ECMA compliance


> > The important thing is encoding - what encoding to use.
> > Many widely-used code editors are not "Unicode-enabled", moreover some
> > have problems with anything beyond 7-bit charset.
> > So maybe it's better to have only English version embedded, and separate
> > files with translation.
>
> I think we can take this decision based on whether we should split out
> the documentation out or not.   If we can split out the documentation, I
> would advocate the use of specialized tools that would assist in the
> translation process.
>
> Come to think of it, it would be possible for the documentation tool
> *AND* the translation tool to use System.Reflection to extract all the
> public members, and display which ones need documentation to be written
> (something that right now with source code is really hard to do, as we
> have to go manually to each file and verify everything).
>
> A Windows.Forms client could be able to track everything: summary,
> remarks, parameter description for each argument and would also help in
> that people would not have to write the XML strings ever, they will just
> cope with a specialized client that presents the best possible UI to
> document something.
>
> For translation, the tool could use a split display for the original
> english text and the translated text.
>
> > I don't have such experience (moreover, I live in Ukraine, but I can't
even
> > imagine the docs translated to Ukranian, don't ask me why - it's
impossible
> > to explain in English ;-))) - still, I believe localization is very
> > important).
>
> GNOME comes with Ukranian translations ;-)
>
>
> Miguel.
>