Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations

huh ?

Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations

food for thought = something that makes you think.

Interesting post.

Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations
  • 2009/9/24 20:19

  • optikool

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 154

  • Since: 2007/3/26

DCrussader I hope you realize how different Joomla is from Xoops. Joomla is build on an MVC module that makes components and plugins more standardized... XOOPS doesn't (hopefully one day it will). I don't know where you got that html code block from but you shouldn't be using that as an example unless you are showing how not to code html... in that case it's fine. HTML and Styling should be seperate. 'define' is a PHP keyword and reading define statements is not that difficult if you know how to read between quotes. Joomla decided to use configuration ini files similar to Java. There really is no difference in the readability of the two formats, it just depends on the person and their ability to read. Also from a development standpoint when a developer turns on debugging, he should see when a constant (_X_XSOAP_SERVERKEY) has been defined twice and make the correction. I don't know if you'd be able to do that with a Joomla ini file. But it is helpful to know some php so that you can understand why you use define. The ini files from Joomla are pretty much just text files so anybody can modify those.

I will admit that a lot of the html code writing coming from some of the XOOPS Developers is maddening especially when you need to change something. XOOPS admins should put out some coding standards, like when to use tables and when to use Divs. Personally I think Joomla looks to be a pretty cool CMS with a lot of features XOOPS doesn't have but there are also some things Joomla doesn't have that I'd like to see. For example a nice gallery. I don't like the fact I have to use a code block in an article in the majority of the galleries Joomla offers. Why can't I have an admin menu that allows me to create new galleries and assign them to different categories like I can do with my gallery module. I also don't like any of the movie modules for pretty much the same reason. Maybe you can only add code blocks or maybe that is the easiest for the developer to do, not sure... but that's pathetic. Since my website has both a gallery and videos, this is important to me, however it might not be important to others.

One thing the erks me about XOOPS though is the module directory being in the url and the fact that I cannot create friendly URLs. I'm hoping this if fixed as well. What would really be nice is if XOOPS was completely re designed so that it uses an MVC framework but we'll see if that happens.

Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations


I don't know where you got that html code block from but you shouldn't be using that as an example unless you are showing how not to code html... in that case it's fine.

This was an example how easy u can make a template (xoops) or layout (jdownloads), the given example is a HTML code yeah, with place holders (eg. tags) which are used in the given example for JDownloads. Everyone can compare both layout codes from WF-Downloads (for example) and JDownloads.

Offtopic: Any news about XOOPS Multisite hack and SEF, will they be implemented in the final release ?

Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations
  • 2009/9/25 15:53

  • optikool

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 154

  • Since: 2007/3/26

That is actually the poor way of coding templates. Hopefully it is just that, an example, and you are not really coding in that way. There should not be any width and height tags in the HTML code and there's no reason why you need to be using inline styles when a stylesheet is easier to maintain and read, especially when you are creating this template yourself and not trying to override others styles. If you are making templates for others, your templates will go through less ridicule is you separate the presentation from your code.

Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations

ok, why the ugliest only one option for such service WF-Downloads looks twice uglier compared to jDownloads

WF-Downloads (https://xoops.org/modules/repository/) vs jDownloads (http://cmsbg.info/index.php?option=com_jdownloads&Itemid=2)

The answer was about why i'm using joomla to share XOOPS files, and it was anwered, moderators please delete or move the other crap.


Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations

Russian translation XOOPS 2.4.0 Final in sourceforge.net

http://xoops.svn.sourceforge.net/view ... uages/russian/core/2.4.0/

Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations
  • 2009/10/26 16:40

  • Mamba

  • Moderator

  • Posts: 11251

  • Since: 2004/4/23

Russian translation XOOPS 2.4.0 Final in sourceforge.net

Thank you so much!!!

Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations
  • 2009/10/26 23:20

  • sadistiko

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 477

  • Since: 2004/12/13

to DCrussader


The package XOOPS 2.4.0 RC Translators Edition can be obtained from my site.

The package contain all language files for XOOPS itself, if u plan to make a full translation, eg. installation, upgrade, editors, themes etc. If u plan to make simple translation (like mine), u have to translate the following in UTF-8 without Byte of Mark, no full UTF-8 conversion, NotePad Plus have both options from the drop-down menu Format.


Can you reupload it now with 2.4.0 version?
Thanks in advance

Re: XOOPS 2.4.x Translations
  • 2009/10/27 0:02

  • Mazarin

  • Just can't stay away

  • Posts: 533

  • Since: 2008/12/10

Does anyone have a specification of what is different in the language files of 2.4.0 Final compared to RC?



Lost Password? Register now!

Who's Online

69 user(s) are online (42 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)

Members: 0

Guests: 69



Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Jun 30
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits