Re: Localization good practices

On 29/10/2025 17:39, Patrick Cardona wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Seemingly, duplicating gorm files in *.lproj folders could not be a 
> good practice.
> So, if we should use only Localizable.strings, what should be the good 
> expected practice.
>
> Recently, we had some experiences with the need to duplicate gorm 
> files (like within SimpleAgenda: see: 
> https://github.com/poroussel/simpleagenda/issues/14) and in the same 
> time that this choice could lead us in inconsistency (see French UI 
> issue within AddressManager before svn revision 4073).
>
> So I am sorry to ask again, but wee need to know approved practices to 
> be efficient and helpful with Localization contribution.

Just my opinion:

I do not believe that there is a single 'good practice' here. The 
differences in the lengths of phrases in different languages can mean 
that a layout that suits one language  may not suit another language, so 
sometimes an app developer may want to provide multiple gorm files.  The 
standard resource loading mechanism supports this, picking the correct 
gorm file for the currently selected locale in preference to any 
unlocalised file.

I think an app developer should always provide a gorm file (or 
equivalent xib etc) which will be used if there is no specifically 
localised file for the current locale.

While locale specific files may provide the best possible UI, it's a lot 
more work for the developer/maintainer of an app, so it's optional.  
Carefully designed interfaces can generally be made to work with a small 
amount of text and be designed so that the necessary text will look good 
in all (or almost all) languages.

So I would say that, while the common practice is to have a single gorm 
file and a set of strings files (one for each locale), that does not 
mean that there is anything wrong with also having different gorm files 
for different locales.