Re: [docbook-apps] UI strings vs manual strings ?

[Jean-Christophe Helary <lists@traduction-libre.org>]

> On Dec 13, 2022, at 19:28, Tony Graham <tgraham@antenna.co.jp> wrote:
> 
> What result are you looking for?

I am looking for an authoring process where software UI strings can 
easily be handled in the documentation.

I'm imagining that there would be an editor that uses a UI strings 
"library" as reference and calls its contents when required in the doc 
during the build process.

What would be the best way to achieve that in a DocBook centered process?

> Are you treating one language (say, English) as the main language (which
> has empty elements for value lookups) and the other languages as end
> products (which have all text filled in), where you'd use OmegaT's
> translation memory to keep translations consistent across revisions?

I'm not sure I understand the above question, even though I've been 
using OmegaT almost daily for the past 20 years.

> Or do you want the other languages to be structurally equivalent to the
> main version (apart from inline elements moved around because of
> sentence structure), where elements containing text are turned back into
> empty elements?

I don't understand the second part "where elements containing text are 
turned back into empty elements?".

Jean-Christophe 

> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Tony Graham.
> -- 
> Senior Architect
> XML Division
> Antenna House, Inc.
> ----
> Skerries, Ireland
> tgraham@antenna.co.jp
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-apps-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-apps-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> 

-- 
Jean-Christophe Helary @jchelary@emacs.ch
https://traductaire-libre.org
https://mac4translators.blogspot.com
https://sr.ht/~brandelune/omegat-as-a-book/