Internationalization DevHub

[atimmer]

We need to think about internationalisation for DevHub, the auto generated nature of it provides us with some interesting challenges.

[atimmer]

There are several parts that need to be internationalized:

• The parsed documentation from the WordPress source code
• The WordPress theme that is used for DevHub
• Some possibility to add comments in your own language
• I will highlight below what I think about each of them.

Parsed documentation
This is a hard one because WordPress core is in english which makes sense because PHP is in english. This gives us an interesting challenge, we need to translate content generated from the source. I think the best solution here is to throw all generated text into glotpress versioned into GlotPress so translators can translate it the way they are used to. This means we need to extend WP-Parser to do this.

The WordPress theme
This one is fairly easy: Throw it in GlotPress and we are mostly done. Maybe there are some parts that need i18n improvements but we will find that out soon enough.

Some possibility to add comments in your own language
I think this should be done the same way as the theme and plugin directory, so we could have nl.developer.wordpress.org that is a dutch version of DevHub. I don't know what this entails for the meta team.

Timeline
I think it is important to stress that this needs to happen before the codex disappears. Currently there is content on there that is translated and last WordCamp The Netherlands the organization were actively guiding people to help translating the codex. It will be an enormous amount of work to translate it all, so we should have core documentation in GlotPress asap.

[samuelsidler]

See also: ​https://make.wordpress.org/polyglots/2015/05/27/translating-documentation/

Note that we don't want to add a new way to internationalize things for devhub. We need to do it in a way that will be done across WordPress.org, which is still up for discussion.

[ocean90]

#3846 was marked as a duplicate.

[dd32]

#3347 was marked as a duplicate.