Replies: 3 comments 1 reply
|
good questions here! the that said, the my own preference, at this point in time, is the google translate method. it has alleviated a lot of build/maintenance headaches for us. |
|
I ran into a problem in #2398 where introducing new pages (and hence cross-references) can diverge between the English and Spanish versions. Obviously, since it's unused, I can't remember the last time CROWDIN actually ran to regenerate old pages, much less add text for new ones. So you run into a situation where new links only apply to docs outside |
|
we've landed on a google translate strategy for this, and the merge of #2410 codifies it. the (bothersome lol) |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There are a lot of legacy imports in
i18nwhich use CROWDIN translations. The documentation on this was last updated in #1147 a little over a year ago. Comparatively, Kaan introduced the cool Google on-the-fly translations last month.I understand that some of the Spanish CROWDIN pages were manually proofread, although I can't tell by whom based on the git history. Obviously we don't have this with the script — but we do get real-time updates. In #2145, I saw just how out-of-date some of these
i18npages got, often falling two or three commits behind in content substance.However, I also found myself adding Spanish-only pages based on international content, which you can't really do with the Translate drop-in. Thus, we find ourselves with two options for internationalization which affect site build structure. Which methods do people prefer, or has there been any other discussion on this?
All reactions