[Zope3-dev] Issue 301

[Dmitry Vasiliev]

Stephan Richter wrote:
>>Should '<span i18n:name="foo">bar</span>' pass '<span>bar</span>' to the
>>msgid mapping or just 'bar'?
> 
> Wow, so this gets hairy and we need to get it right. Unfortunately, tests 
> right now support both practices. So here are my observations:
> 
> <p i18n:translate="">
>   This house is <em i18n:name="color" i18n:translate="">red</em>.
> </p>
> 
> The case above should produce two message ids:
> 
> "This house is $color."
> "red"
> 
> Note: The XML element containing i18n:name is *not* part of the second message 
> id. Also, the <em> tag is not part of the outer message id.
> 
> So here is the way to think about this. The I18n name, as seen from the outer 
> translation is the entire <em> element. However, the <em> element itself only 
> sends its content out as a message id. 
> 
> Further, there need to be some rules deciding when the <em> tag should be 
> omitted. I agree with Marius and Godefroid that it should only be omitted 
> when either "tal:replace" or "tal:omit-tag" is specified. 
> 
> It thus follows:
> 
> - test_content_with_messageid_and_i18nname in test_talinterpreter.py is 
>   correct.
> 
> - test36.html is incorrect.
> 
> - Marius' submitted test is correct.

Ok, I fully agree with this changes, but then I have one more question. Should 
we do this changes on ZopeX3.0 branch? That about backward compatibility for 
3.0, for example if someone use code like this: '<h1 i18n:name="H1">foo</h1>'?

-- 
Dmitry Vasiliev (dima at hlabs.spb.ru)
     http://hlabs.spb.ru