Re: tag for translators?

[Taketoshi Sano <kgh12351@nifty.ne.jp>]

Hi.

In <20001201104814.A3639@kldp.org>,
 on "Fri, 1 Dec 2000 10:48:14 +0900",
 with "Re: tag for translators?",
 <kss@kldp.org> wrote:

> As far as I know, the current linuxdoc-tools have some problem with
> debian(because of japanese-groff patch which debian's groff package uses).
> Is it fixed already? When I first heard about linuxdoc-tools from
> Choi, I got to know there is some problem with debian(from debian-kr 
> mailing list) & linuxdoc-tools. So I didn't even try it. I'm sorry Choi...:-)

I have posted the patch for groff to the debian-i18n list, and
the BTS #66928 & #71744.  I don't know why the maintainer of
groff use it. Maybe he is busy now.  You can send a request/reminder
to the maintainer of groff, I think.

> Now let me see.....
> The current linuxdoc DTD has two varients(I think "linuxdoc" for 
> original author, "linuxdoctr" for translator because it accepts
> <trans>, <tdate>). 
> 
> How about merging the two DTDs and make the "linuxdoc" accept
> <trans>, <tdate>? If it is acceptable, this will be a clear solution.

I have tried to do it, but there has not been enough time yet.
The problem I have is the fake error message from groff when using
linuxdoc with trans and tdate for sgml source without those elements
(i.e. an original version, not translated one).

> Or if mapping <trans>,<tdate> to <othercredit role="translator"> operates 
> properly, local translation effort would be much easier.

I don't get this.  Do you mean using trans and tdate in DocBook DTD SGML ?
Maybe I will not agree with it.  Excuse me if you mean another thing.

> (Of course the ldp.dsl need to be changed so that <othercredit> is printed.)

I wish to have it also, but I'm not ready to hack the DSSSL sheet yet.

-- 
  Taketoshi Sano: <kgh12351@nifty.ne.jp>


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org