Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
hacks.mozilla.org
Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
1–10 of 117 posts
Re: Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
#2OMG this is so cool to a person who lives in the CJK world (to be specific, I’m Korean) where the order of noun/verb/adj is reversed and always gets to see programs that display text something like ‘Site is news reader HN’, ‘Button press confirm to’.
It’s a pity that the programming world is still super bad at i18n :-(
Re: Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
#3I joke that prima face fluent is to gettext/other i18n frameworks that rust is to c/c++ , well designed and thoughtful.
Re: Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
#4Nice! This honestly sounds really great; coincidentally as a Czech person, the multiple plural forms have sort of been a bane of i18n for me, a surprising amount of solutions don't even take this into account at all (?!) or require dumb workarounds.
With Mozilla's experience and adherence to ideals of interoperability and openness, I can see Fluent as a solid "golden standard" solution for a great chunk of i18n needs :)
Re: Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
#5OMG this is so cool to a person who lives in the CJK world (to be specific, I’m Korean) where the order of noun/verb/adj is reversed and always gets to see programs that display text something like ‘Site is news reader HN’, ‘Button press confirm to’. It’s a pity that the programming world is still super bad at i18n :-(
I18n is something like security, it takes a lot of effort to get right, people often don’t know that their assumptions are subtly wrong, and getting them right often requires using a more complicated solution. No wonder programmers just cop out and settle for ASCII, naïve string comparisons, first name & surname fields, etc.
And the problems go quite deep, all the way down to standard libraries and programming languages. The Swift debate about correct and performant Unicode string processing was very interesting – people are very hard to convince that string is not a collection of characters randomly accessible with integer indexes.
Re: Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
#6Nice! This honestly sounds really great; coincidentally as a Czech person, the multiple plural forms have sort of been a bane of i18n for me, a surprising amount of solutions don't even take this into account at all (?!) or require dumb workarounds. With Mozilla's experience and adherence to ideals of interoperability and openness, I can see Fluent as a solid "golden standard" solution for a great chunk of i18n needs…
Ahoj! :) This is a perfect article that always comes to mind when talking pluralization:
https://metacpan.org/pod/distribution/Locale-Maketext/lib/Lo...
We Czechs have it easy!
Re: Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
#7In the Czech example, how is it obvious that `few` stands for 2, 3, 4? Is that just how the concept of "few" (note the English term) is defined and understood by all Cezch speakers and thus this language specific meaning is encoded by Mozilla to map to the range 2-4?
My point is that while there might be a concept of "few" that does map uniquely to that range, I am not sure naming the keyword "few" is the right name for this.
Quite honestly it would be easier to understand if it were explicitly referring to the range. After all these strings are provided specific to a language anyway. As such why not encode the rules in them explicitly instead of relying on keywords?
Or are those merely user defined abstractions to accomplish reuse? I guess it would help, but I'm still not sure why this needs a whole new framework.
Re: Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
#8This look really good! As someone in ruby-land I wish there was some easy way to get notified if/when a fluent-ruby gem becomes available.
Re: Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
#9Nice! This honestly sounds really great; coincidentally as a Czech person, the multiple plural forms have sort of been a bane of i18n for me, a surprising amount of solutions don't even take this into account at all (?!) or require dumb workarounds. With Mozilla's experience and adherence to ideals of interoperability and openness, I can see Fluent as a solid "golden standard" solution for a great chunk of i18n needs…
Ahoj! :) This is a perfect article that always comes to mind when talking pluralization: https://metacpan.org/pod/distribution/Locale-Maketext/lib/Lo... We Czechs have it easy!
Great article! I'm always impressed by the thought going into Perl libraries.
There was a presentation years ago, how Perl handled Unicode right and every other programming language didn't (with Python 3 pretty close, IIRC).
Does anyone remember the URL?
Re: Fluent 1.0: a localization system for natural-sounding translations
#10In the Czech example, how is it obvious that `few` stands for 2, 3, 4? Is that just how the concept of "few" (note the English term) is defined and understood by all Cezch speakers and thus this language specific meaning is encoded by Mozilla to map to the range 2-4? My point is that while there might be a concept of "few" that does map uniquely to that range, I am not sure naming the keyword "few" is the right name…
(Author of the blog post here.) Great question, thanks! Unicode defines six categories of plural forms: zero, one, two, few, many, and other. The names of these categories always appear in English. Unicode also maintains a collection of all mappings of numerical rules to these categories, for all languages supported by the CLDR. See http://www.unicode.org/cldr/charts/latest/supplemental/langu... for the mapping corresponding to the Czech grammar.