In T11070#238043, @clel wrote:

You might have some good points here. I understand that for an active team there is not much need for such a system. However, almost no language has all Strings translated already when looking at: https://l10n.kde.org/stats/gui/stable-kf5/team/. Quite the opposite if you look how much untranslated Strings there are for many languages. So apparently almost no team is active enough to reach a completeness level of 100 %. Thus I assume they lack the time and manpower.

In T11070#237987, @clel wrote:

In that case I have to say that many users maybe just want to quickly correct some Strings for their application that they use. Having to get familiar with a rather complicated and for that task to complex offline workflow is a high barrier.

Periodical injection of PO files into source trees can make developers to avoid cross-checking git and SVN when there is a bug related to translation. Let's take an example of Krita bug https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=408481. Although it was not Korean translation's fault, but if it really was then developers don't have to check Korean translation SVN tree and possibly bisect the revision where mistranslation had been introduced.

In T11070#238001, @clel wrote:

In T11070#237992, @yurchor wrote:

No. And you know what I mean. Typing, for sure, is as fast as for offline tools. But switching between translations is slow. And it eats plenty of time if you typing fast. It takes ~3-4 seconds just to switch between translations.

I just had a test with the dev tools in Firefox. It displayed me 1.45 s for loading the page with the next translation after submitting the previous one. I admit that this is noticeable, but accapteable and not really slowing down the translation process much. I tested on https://hosted.weblate.org/translate/osmand/ios/de/. Let me know if you have a different site where the performance is worse. Also, if it takes really 3-4 seconds for you, it might have to do with your setup. I don't say that to blame you, but to try to understand. That amount is clearly a bad user experience that one should try to avoid.

As using summit globally was mentioned in T11070#198358 I am setting the parent task.

In T11070#233740, @ltoscano wrote:

Right now the people who manage the repository can easily apply a global change to all languages. Splitting into per language git repositories would make management impossible. Having a single git repository may be complicate to handle for the various teams (even long term translators can easily work with svn, but git poses a few more challenges; teams who will only access through a web interface won't care.

In D25339#663833, @rjvbb wrote:

doesn't it give you US-ASCII canonical representations of every possible glyph?

In D25339#663462, @rjvbb wrote:

This patch is only needed when mixing a main Latin1 (like) alphanumeric font with occasional glyphs from a font that have a different, taller height?

In D25339#563370, @xuetianweng wrote:

And what I'd like to point is, for CJK users, it is uncommon for them to select a single font to cover all the characters, because such fonts are really rare. People usually select one latin only font and just let system (fontconfig) select the fallback for them.