- From: loubrett <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 21:10:35 -0700
- To: w3c/manifest <manifest@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <w3c/manifest/issues/975/958642557@github.com>
I like the idea of aligning this and translations. The current [proposal](https://github.com/WICG/manifest-incubations/blob/gh-pages/translations-explainer.md) for translations is an object with the languages as keys and an object containing the translated members as the values: ``` "translations": { "fr": { "name": "Bon chien", "description": "Une application pour chiens", "icons": [], "screenshots": [] } }, ``` The main difference between translations and user preferences is that order matters for user preferences but not translations. So the translations proposal wouldn’t suit user preferences unless we rely on the JSON object being ordered (which probably isn’t a good idea as discussed earlier in the thread). I think this context/redefine proposal works well for both. This design also allows more fields to be added later alongside context and redefine. I’m not sure what (if anything) would be added but I think it’s good to have the option. We could also allow the context string to have multiple comma separated values to reduce duplication. (eg `“context”: “en-AU, en-NZ”`). I think we shouldn’t allow overlap between the members that can be redefined in translations and user preferences, otherwise we need to figure out what happens if something is defined in both. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/975#issuecomment-958642557
Received on Wednesday, 3 November 2021 04:10:48 UTC