LanguagePak (LPak) Community Project/Program

[Ixion77]

What about Interface Zero and Deadlands resource files?

[dulux-oz]

What about Interface Zero and Deadlands resource files?

Are you volunteering to do the translations?

Or are you asking for them to be done?

[Ixion77]

Are you volunteering to do the translations?

Or are you asking for them to be done?

Now I'm testing both Core SW Italian localization updated by me, and SW too. And would like to challenge me with Italian localization for both IZ and DLR.

[dulux-oz]

Hi Everyone,

First of all I'd like to apologise for taking longer than I intended to get back to this and get things up-to-date - sorry.

Second, I'd like to thank all of you who have been/are a member of the Project/Program - I, as well as everyone who has used an LPak, really appreciate all your hard work!

Because I've updated the LPak Framework and the Ruleset Resource Archives (due to requests by the Project/Program) all of the existing Ruleset LPaks now need updating, so they have all been marked as "Not Current". They should all still work, but they will not be complete. LPaks for Extensions have not been effected. So we need people to pitch in and update the existing Ruleset LPaks and, of course, develop new ones for the Rulesets, Extensions and Languages we haven't cover yet.

We want and welcome your involvement and participation in the Project/Program, and to help both you and us in this I strongly suggest you take the time to read the updated Framework Documentation available on Post #2. You'll save yourselves a lot of heartache and extra work if you do and if you follow the process contained within it. PLEASE read it (even if you're an old-hand at LPaks) to make sure you understand how to participate in the Project/Program effectively - its no use "doing your own thing" because then we can't really include your work because its not maintainable in the same way that a properly constructed LPak is, which is a great shame and a lose we'd rather not have to endure.

So come and join us! Read the Framework Documentation (its only a few pages long) to learn how to be an effective Project Contributor and to see what's changed from previous versions, ask some questions if you don't understand something or need some clarification, and help contribute to the great product that is Fantasy Grounds.

Matthew James BLACK
Project/Program Manager

aka

[Ixion77]

Here is my first attempt with the LPak-Italian-CoreRPG for FG 3.2.1
This is an update of the previous version translated by Gandalf, so in the credits I took care to even leave his name.
First doubt: root version="3.1" must change to 3.2.1 ?
Second: about the version of this extension, since it is an update, I'v changed the <version> from 2.0 to 2.1
I hope goes well, this is mi first code-work :P

[dulux-oz]

Excellemt!

Thankyou Ixion

No, the 3.1 does not refer to the version of FG, but to the version of the FG-Engine, so it needs to stay 3.1.

Your version number (2.1) is fine.

Cheers

[Markjan]

Hello everyone

Here is my first work for official LPack extensions in french language for CoreRPG, DD3.5 and PFRPG.
(I still have to localize somme graphic buttons and icons...)

Dulux please tell me if everything seems ok for you.

Best regards

[dulux-oz]

Hi Markjan,

Yes, the three LPaks work well - thank you.

One thing: the idea behind the LPak Project/Program is to develop "layered" LPaks that build upon one another, in the same way that the FG Rulesets are "layered" on top of the CoreRPG. This way we only need to put a string resource or a graphic resource into a given LPak if it isn't already in a previous loaded LPak. So in this case, as there are no graphic resources in the PFRPG Ruleset there shouldn't be any need have all the (translated) graphic resources from the CoreRPG and the 3.5E Rulesets in the PFRPG LPak - instead, they should be in the CoreRPG-LPak or the 3.5E LPak. Similarly for the CoreRPG-LPak; it shouldn't need to have any of the CoreRPG graphic resources in it - they should be in the CoreRPG LPak.

And yes, this means that we need to load the CoreRPG-LPak, the 3.5E-LPak and the PFRPG-LPak when we play PF - and the LPak-Framework handles this by specifying that the 3.5E-LPak is dependent upon the CoreRPG-LPak (for eg).

OK, so why does this all matter? Well, there are several reasons: first of all, by having graphic and string resources duplicated in LPaks means there is more work for us to create, update and maintain the LPaks; second, it leads to the potential for more mistakes and "missed" translations; third, it requires more computer resources to load the same graphic (and string) multiple times; and forth (although this may not mean much to many people) its bad coding practice to do it this way.

So... the three LPaks you have done all work, and they all work well, but there is a better, more efficient way to achieve our goal - its a bit like using an 18-wheel semi-trailer to move your stuff across town when a car or a small van is way more appropriate.

Cheers

[drvolk]

Hi dulux-oz,

are the current LPak resources allready updated to 3.2.2 ?

I want to update my LPaks to "current" state, but if you plan to release an updated version to 3.2.2 (if not allready is the case) then i would wait for that

[dulux-oz]

are the current LPak resources allready updated to 3.2.2 ?

Yes