#2 Avoid translations being outdated after non-content changes in EN version

开启中
max.mehl2 年前创建 · 4 条评论
max.mehl 评论于 2 年前

There are several old news items for which the translations are displayed as outdated, but they are not (maybe a typo was fixed in the English version).

As we don’t alter news items content wise after publication, is there a way we can now change the status of the old news items, and make sure that does not happen in future?

Currently, editors have to manually fake-update all translations if they make a minor fix. There has been a discussion in Jan 2015 (“Dealing with translations incorrectly labelled outdated”) but maybe we are in a better technical position now.

There are several old news items for which the translations are displayed as outdated, but they are not (maybe a typo was fixed in the English version). As we don't alter news items content wise after publication, is there a way we can now change the status of the old news items, and make sure that does not happen in future? Currently, editors have to manually fake-update all translations if they make a minor fix. There has been a discussion in Jan 2015 ("Dealing with translations incorrectly labelled outdated") but maybe we are in a better technical position now.
max.mehl 添加了标签
translations
2 年前
max.mehl 添加了标签
feature-request
2 年前

As mentioned in the webmasters mailing-list, a quick fix could be to add a tag in the xHTML documents.

The tag would look like following:

<lastedit major="yyyy-mm-dd hh:MM" minor="yyyy-mm-dd hh:MM" />

The script deciding whether the text box should be displayed or not could compare the lastedit.major date in the main document with the last lastedit.major in the translation. When the tag is not present, it would fallback to the document last modified date.

As said in the mailing list, this is far from foolproof, but given the translations need to be pushed to the git, doing a pull request, there at least is a hacker in the loop to control such a tag exists and is up to date.

This is the best user-friendliness/ease-of-implementation ratio I can come with!

As [mentioned in the webmasters mailing-list](https://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/web/2018-May/012243.html), a quick fix could be to add a tag in the xHTML documents. The tag would look like following: <lastedit major="yyyy-mm-dd hh:MM" minor="yyyy-mm-dd hh:MM" /> The script deciding whether the text box should be displayed or not could compare the `lastedit.major` date in the main document with the last `lastedit.major` in the translation. When the tag is not present, it would fallback to the document last modified date. As said in the mailing list, this is far from foolproof, but given the translations need to be pushed to the git, doing a pull request, there at least is a hacker in the loop to control such a tag exists and is up to date. This is the best user-friendliness/ease-of-implementation ratio I can come with!
reinhard 评论于 6 个月前
协作者

It might be easier to handle if we introduce a version number of the text rather than a full date, like <version>2</version>.

It might be easier to handle if we introduce a version number of the text rather than a full date, like `<version>2</version>`.
max.mehl 评论于 5 个月前
所有者

I disliked the manual version number for a long time but meanwhile think it might really be the most sensible approach…

I disliked the manual version number for a long time but meanwhile think it might really be the most sensible approach...
jzarl 评论于 2 个月前
协作者

I second that approach, and would prefer the simple flat ‘version’ tag. This would also make bulk edits much easier…

I second that approach, and would prefer the simple flat 'version' tag. This would also make bulk edits much easier...
登陆 并参与到对话中。
未选择里程碑
未指派成员
4 名参与者
到期时间

未设置到期时间。

依赖工单

此工单当前没有任何依赖。

正在加载...
取消
保存
这个人很懒,什么都没留下。