ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[David Planella <david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Alex,

I guess this will depend on the scope, but to give an example we can take
the click scope:

- Scope code (translations shipped in .mo files): 15 messages
- Scope ini file (assuming we only want to translate the DisplayName key in
the ini file): 1 message

So in terms of space, the inline translations approach has the disadvantage
of containing all translations in the ini file, whereas .mo files are
language-specific and we can choose which languages we want to install by
default. That said, ini files would only contain 1 translatable string (and
let's say 40 translated versions of that string).

Let me know if this provides enough context.

Cheers,
David.


On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Alex Chiang <achiang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 8:20 AM, David Planella
> <david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > We think using this option (inline translations in the ini files vs
> reading
> > the translations from .mo files) is the best solution in terms of
> > performance when reading the list of scopes, but we'd like to hear other
> > comments/views too.
>
> What is the typical number of strings in a scope?
>
> My guess is fairly minimal, but would like to see some data.
>
> [The context of my question is to understand the disk size
> implications of inline translations...]
>
> Thanks.
>