|
|
Posted by BLob on 01/13/06 16:35
> I use a table 'strings' with the fields:
> - stringnumber
> - language
> - string
I thought about this structure, but I don't know if it is better or worse
than the one I proposed in my first post. 'string' has to be a 'text' field
in the database in order to hold both data from what would otherwise be
varchar and text. Isn't this a problem ? (I don't know).
> and in the 'news' table I have all the fields necessary, but all
> multilanguage fields contain the stringnumber instead of the text itself.
OK.
> I could not say if this approach was better than yours, it is just
> different. The advantage of it is that you have access to any string
> regardless of the information about what object it belongs to. This
> makes it easy to make fallbacks for the case some info is not present in
> the desired language, somehow like
Yes, it makes it easier for the 'translation' process. But on the other hand
I guess it makes it more complicated to search within information (search
engine), as you don't know what type of data you have without making links
to other tables. That's why I chose the other approach, but maybe I am wrong
and there is a pretty work around do do efficient searches with the
structure you described. What do you think ?
BLob
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|