openoffice-l10n mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From T J <jtee...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: Pootle search AOO's vs LO's
Date Thu, 23 Jan 2014 03:14:53 GMT
I translate for both AOO and LO. So I need to search a lot to work on the same string. I'm
trying to place accelerators consistently for identical strings. And it would be easier if
I don't have to scan over irrelevant strings. I agree that both systems don't handle it well.
By the way, what's a JIRA?

> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 08:48:37 +0100
> Subject: Re: Pootle search AOO's vs LO's
> From: jani@apache.org
> To: l10n@openoffice.apache.org
> 
> On 22 January 2014 07:13, T J <jteera5@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > It seems to me that LibreOffice's Pootle server is a bit more inteligent
> > than AOO's Pootle. For example, when you seach all for "Delete C~ells..."
> > in LO's Pootle, you get 3 results in 1 page. With AOO's Pootle, you get 443
> > results. There're lots of Delete and other irrelevant words. Looks like
> > AOO's Pootle has troubles with accelerators.
> >
> 
> 
> I dont see the big difference (except in numbers), search on c~ells, and
> you get results like
> C~ollect
> C~enter
> ....
> 
> So I would say both systems dont handle it well.
> 
> The difference is because LO pootle is still 2.5.0 while we have upgrade to
> 2.5.1, which gives a number of new features.
> 
> If you feel its a real error, then please create a JIRA, since the pootle
> server is a shared Apache service.
> 
> rgds
> jan I.
 		 	   		  
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message