Re: [PATCH v2 10/16] docs/zh_TW: process: localize terminology in 2.Process.rst

On 8/10/26 2:59 PM, 葉宸佑 wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 09:28:20PM +0800, Weijie Yuan wrote:
>> I might be more inclined to remain neutral, so I would prefer to hear
>> the opinions of others. Or we could take a look at how zh_CN and
>> jp_JP handle it.
> Fair enough -- I put that entry in the v3 glossary before seeing this,
> so let me pull it back to a description rather than a rule.
>
> Here is what the other locales look like, same measurement (a CJK
> character directly adjacent to an ASCII alphanumeric):
>
> zh_CN    有空格   3624 / 無空格  11022
> ja_JP    有空格    128 / 無空格     70
> ko_KR    有空格     93 / 無空格      0


For the translation projects in our club, the requirement is to have 
spaces between. It is better for readers.

However, zh_CN translation needs more translation than the format. Thus 
I don't force this rule.

Dongliang Mu

>
>
>> Or: for new articles, we can start to require spaces between.
> I am sympathetic, since spaces are what I would write myself. My worry
> is that it makes the tree inconsistent in a way that is visible within
> a single document -- a reader opening howto.rst would see one style in
> the paragraphs we have rewritten and another in the ones we have not.
> Right now the inconsistency at least correlates with nothing in
> particular.
>
> So I would suggest either:
>
>    (a) describe current practice in the glossary without making it a
>        rule, and revisit once we have more contributors, or
>    (b) agree on spaces as the target style, and let it spread naturally
>        as files get rewritten -- accepting mixed files in the interim
>
> I lean towards (a) for now, but I do not feel strongly. If you or the
> zh_CN side prefer (b) I will follow. Either way I can adjust the
> glossary in v4 or as a follow-up.

Me too. Agree on (a) for current situation.

My further plan is to format the mature translation with your strict 
rules folder by folder.

>
> Chen-Yu
>
> Weijie Yuan <[email protected]> 於 2026年8月7日週五 下午9:28寫道：
>> On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 02:48:35AM +0800, 葉宸佑 wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 04, 2026 at 12:22:12AM +0800, Weijie Yuan wrote:
>>>> Either: add a <space> before staging
>>>> Or: remove the <space> after staging
>>>>
>>>> [A] Greg Kroah-Hartman 目前負責維護staging樹。
>>>> [B] Greg Kroah-Hartman 目前負責維護 staging 樹。
>>>>
>>>> Which one do you prefer? I think the first option is more consistent
>>>> with the usage throughout the text.
>>> Sorry, I misread that as two separate changes. You are right that it
>>> should be one or the other.
>>>
>>> I went and counted across the whole zh_TW tree, matching a CJK
>>> character directly adjacent to an ASCII alphanumeric with and without
>>> a space:
>>>
>>>    without space: 2581
>>>    with space:     721
>>>
>>> 2.Process.rst itself is 69 without / 22 with. So [A] it is, both for
>>> the file and for the tree as a whole. Fixed in v3.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, my own preference as a Taiwanese reader would
>>> have been [B] -- a space between CJK and Latin text is easier to read
>>> and is what most Taiwanese technical writing does nowadays. But the
>>> existing translations overwhelmingly do not, and this series is about
>>> terminology, not typography. Mixing the two would make it much harder
>>> to review.
>> Yes, I think a space between CJK and Latin text is more "proper", or
>> a more "universal" way.
>>
>>> That said, it is probably worth writing the rule down rather than
>>> leaving each contributor to guess. I would suggest:
>>>
>>>    - no space between CJK and ASCII (following existing practice)
>>>    - apply it to new translations and to paragraphs that are being
>>>      rewritten anyway
>> I might be more inclined to remain neutral, so I would prefer to hear
>> the opinions of others. Or we could take a look at how zh_CN and jp_JP
>> handle it.
>>
>> Or: for new articles, we can start to require spaces between.
>>
>>>    - do not go back and normalize existing files
>> Of course.