Re: GDP: LSR and @commonprop

[John Mandereau]

Le jeudi 06 décembre 2007 à 14:57 +0100, Valentin Villenave a écrit :
> 2007/12/6, Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
> > AFAIK, most of the @commonprop aren't translated anyway, so this isn't
> > really a regression.
> 
> ??? I don't understand. In the former User Manual, we used to
> translate everything we could, didn't we?

Yes, we did.  If we go this way moving many stuff to LSR (which I fully
agree), we *must* i18n LSR.  I volunteer to help with this during my
Christmas vacation, if Sebastiano accepts to make this big change to
LSR.  I guess this is not trivial work, so it might take a couple of
weeks to achieve this.  Sebastiano, what do you think?


> > Why?  The only tags that you might (usefully) use in snippet
> > descriptions are <emph> and <code>.  Those are *already* automatically
> > translated into texinfo.
> 
> That's not the only useful tags, as you know. I'm afraid we'd require
> this feature to get really consistent formatting between the NR and
> the integrated snippets. I'd like, at least, to know how difficult
> this would be to implement (if there's a chance that it could easily
> be done, we should take IMO).

If we can handle this by simple text substitution -- I expect we can --
let's do it!

Cheers,
John