Quick question

[Amaso.]

Someone did a client hack with Google translate at some point... then got their account banned from the API as a result.

o____o

[Lucifer]

I haven't been very descriptive here, heh.

Durf: There are more than "45 or so languages". There's upwards of 80 on the Indian subcontinent, alone. When two Indians from different parts of the country want to speak a common language, they speak English. Even Hindi isn't universal.

Amaso: As to who writes english_base.txt, that would be all developers. Anytime we add string output for anything, we have to create new entries in english_base.txt to accommodate whatever has been added. Logging is different, I don't think we translate for logs, but we may.

Durf: The server does it's translating before sending the string. We have recognized this as a limitation and have considered ways we can get past it. One possibility is to send both the string the server is sending and also the translation token, and leave it to the client on whether or not to display the string the server sends, translate it using the translation token, or both. Since that would represent a major protocol change, we haven't done it. At least, not as far as I know.

[Durf]

I haven't been very descriptive here, heh.

Durf: There are more than "45 or so languages". There's upwards of 80 on the Indian subcontinent, alone. When two Indians from different parts of the country want to speak a common language, they speak English. Even Hindi isn't universal.

I was referring to the supporting languages in the Google Translate API silly. I'm aware there's thousands of languages.. When I asked "what about the other 45 languages or so", it was:
(the supported language choices in API) - (the current languages choices in tron) = ~45 remaining languages available in API.
This is just a rough estimate anyway.

Durf: The server does it's translating before sending the string. We have recognized this as a limitation and have considered ways we can get past it. One possibility is to send both the string the server is sending and also the translation token, and leave it to the client on whether or not to display the string the server sends, translate it using the translation token, or both. Since that would represent a major protocol change, we haven't done it. At least, not as far as I know.

Why would it depend on the server? I don't understand. I mean, the client receives it, so why is the client limited to how it displays it?
We can already turn text off, change when letters begin to get highlighted...
It doesn't make sense to me why the client wouldn't be able to do whatever it wants with the text received.
(no server token, nothing - just a client-side preference of which language to attempt to translate in)
But why would it depend on the server? Can't the client do what it wants?
(much like using console_message client-side, the server does not depend on that.)

[Tank Program]

The client could attempt to do all translation itself, but that's likely to work out pretty poorly especially with phrases like "core dump". Ideally the server would send both a translated and an untranslated string. The client would have to be updated to support the untranslated string and then use its own languages files to decode it. The translated string would still have to be sent for old clients. New code all around.

[Lucifer]

The client could attempt to do all translation itself, but that's likely to work out pretty poorly especially with phrases like "core dump". Ideally the server would send both a translated and an untranslated string. The client would have to be updated to support the untranslated string and then use its own languages files to decode it. The translated string would still have to be sent for old clients. New code all around.

Not to mention the loss for server admins to customize the messages sent. Better to send both, in that case, so that if you're using a server who's messages have been customized, you can see them (provided your locale is the same as the server's).

[Durf]

@Lucifer:
That's why I originally suggested a new setting for server admins to request that no translation be done (for those unique server messages)...please read everything before posting.

@Tank Program:
Yea I guess I was hoping for too much from the API.
Though what about simply adding in predefined terms like "core dump" to be translated first into something more usable like "destroyed" or "decompiled", then send to the API for full translation.
...I guess that's not all that different than just translating between language packs...meh
I was hoping for too much I guess.