Le 01/01/2011 16:00, Robert Haas a écrit :
> On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
>> Le 01/01/2011 06:05, Robert Haas a écrit :
>>> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>> On tor, 2010-12-30 at 11:03 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>>> No, quite the opposite. With the other approach, you needed:
>>>>>
>>>>> constraints cannot be used on views
>>>>> constraints cannot be used on composite types
>>>>> constraints cannot be used on TOAST tables
>>>>> constraints cannot be used on indexes
>>>>> constraints cannot be used on foreign tables
>>>>>
>>>>> With this, you just need:
>>>>>
>>>>> constraints can only be used on tables
>>>>
>>>> At the beginning of this thread you said that the error messages should
>>>> focus on what you tried to do, not what you could do instead.
>>>
>>> Yeah, and I still believe that. I'm having difficulty coming up with
>>> a workable approach, though. It would be simple enough if we could
>>> write:
>>>
>>> /* translator: first %s is a feature, second %s is a relation type */
>>> %s cannot be used on %s
>>>
>>> ...but I think this is likely to cause some translation headaches.
>>
>> Actually, this is simply not translatable in some languages. We had the
>> same issue on pgAdmin, and we resolved this by having quite a big number
>> of new strings to translate. Harder one time for the translator, but
>> results in a much better experience for the user.
>
> Is it in any better if we write one string per feature, like this:
>
> constraints cannot be used on %s
> triggers cannot be used on %s
>
> ...where %s is a plural object type (views, foreign tables, etc.).
>
If %s was a singular object, it would be an issue for french. But for
plural form, it won't be an issue. Not sure it would be the same in
other languages. IIRC from my student years, german could have an issue
here.
--
Guillaumehttp://www.postgresql.frhttp://dalibo.com
