Hi Daniel,

> I'm not convinced yet. AFAIK, most menus (buttons/syswin headers)
> are not computed, which means that the widget just gets passed a 
> string, and can send it "translated" just as well as the model,
> but without touching most applications. So what's the problem?

The problem is the model for translation. I don't argue that the view
translation will work for many situations - but in _all_ of them the model
translation will work too and the model translation covers situations which
the view translation can't handle.

Given that I wonder what the goal of using view translations is after all.
If it's only to reduce the lines of code being touched then (again) let me
point out the approach I was taking before - no code was harmed in the
making of those translations. It does require a bit more "external support"
as you can't augment the strings with #translated calls (or actually, maybe
you even could...) but it didn't do any noticable modifications to the code
(however, as I said in the IRC snippet there are some arguments that can be
made for explicitly tagging strings by calls like #translated). 

If the goal is to have applications being blessfully unaware about
translations then I would like to point out that this won't work anyway. A
great example is here:

   'Button Properties for ',myTarget name

If you have that kind of construction it is impossible to localize it
without changing code. That's just the way it is. An application (or
framework) writer needs to anticipate the need for translation of various
phrases and if she doesn't then that code needs to be touched.

So in short, in my understanding the "view translation" is a fundamentally
flawed model here. Don't go down this path - it puts the responsibility into
places where it doesn't belong (the app is responsible for "localizing
itself" not the menu). If you are concerned about the lines of code being
touched then let's look at this specific issue.

It would be nice if you could clearly state what you are expecting from the
view translations. I am not sure I got the gist of your arguments correctly.

Cheers,
  - Andreas