Board Thread:Watercooler/@comment-24520859-20171121124441/@comment-24757753-20180627165043

Cqm wrote: Personally, I like having separate files for translations for traceability rather than arbitrary pages that are more difficult to track. It also makes it easier to integrate the editor into them. Fair enough! If pages were to be used, some sort of index for them would be useful. The editor could then use this index, with a prefix search used to list existing translations for each page.

KockaAdmiralac wrote: Does  cache better than Lua? If so, we probably won't have problems performance-wise. No idea about performance or caching, though I imaging parsing messages in Lua would be slower than the usual PHP code, since that's likely well optimised due to being used so extensively.

One possible problem I see with  is that it will display the content in user's language regardless of the language of the current article (it will display the some translations in French on an English article to a user that has their language set to French) which may look inconsistent, but I don't know how much of a real problem would that be (especially as we're going towards LangSelect'd pages) That's why I mentioned the  Lua library, which allows a little more control like that.