[Po4a-devel] Help with po4a on Ruby Document format

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Francesco Poli (2016-06-19 15:17:42)
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 00:13:52 +0200 Didier Spaier wrote:
> Hello Didier, thanks for your prompt reply!
> > On 18/06/2016 18:34, Francesco Poli wrote:
> [...]
> > > I am trying to use po4a in order to internationalize the man page,
> > > which is written in Ruby Document format.
> > > The source for the man page (in Ruby Document format, as I said) may be
> > > seen on the public git repository [2], embedded in the program code
> > > (between =begin and =end markers).
> [...]
> > > Could you please suggest a better strategy?
> > 
> > Why not convert this part of the document to the "man" format and
> > then use po4a to "gettextize" it?
> 
> I had considered this strategy, but I was a bit hesitant about
> extracting text to be translated from the generated man page, rather
> than from the actual source (which is in Ruby Document format).
> 
> The man page is regenerated from its source each time the package is
> rebuilt; I am not sure the extraction of text to be translated from
> processed code is a "clean" solution... I would rather work directly
> with the actual source...
> 
> Is it difficult to implement support for Ruby Document format in po4a?
> Maybe I should really file a wishlist bug report...
> Any comments from po4a developers?
> 
> 
> [...]
> > You could also use the txt2tags format instead of the Ruby
> > Document format as then the application txt2tags allow you
> > to convert the document to many formats including man pages.
> 
> Interesting, but is there support for txt2tags format in po4a?
> I cannot find any appropriate module for it...
> 
> > 
> > Alternatively, pandoc can also convert a document in txt2tags
> > format to groff man pages.
> 
> I already know about pandoc, but here the issue is not converting from
> Ruby Document or txt2tags form to the groff man page form (this is
> already accomplished pretty decently by the rdtool package): the point
> is using po4a on the actual source... 

Seems you reject alternative strategies as not "better" in your opinion.

If your interest is not to find a working hack but an elegant solution, 
then I agree the proper approach is to file a wishlist bug to get proper 
support for the format.

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/po4a-devel/attachments/20160619/96f33c17/attachment.sig>