|
Monday 22 January 2007 11:32:53 pm
Hi Jan, From a technical point of view, your answer makes perfectly sense. However, based on what we've seen on real situations, you can add assume quite a few things to simplify: 1) You don't add languages on a daily basis on sites. That's more or less defined since the beginning, and if you add a language, running a big long script to update everything isn't a big problem, and way less than having to find translators ;) 2) The content is not translated issue and language preferences order. (keep in mind that you won't change the priority order, and if you do, running a script isn't a big deal). More over, you won't have 3 site access in norvegian with different language priorities. Therefore, you can safely assume that for each single object, you only have one url per language, hence only 4 for ez.no for instance. About the optimisations you mention, wouldn't it be possible by storing 4 time more urls to keep them and not overcomplicate the system ? Saying that you have one url per language of the object (independent of the site accesses) is not perfect, but it's way better than one url for all the languages, isn't it? X+
http://www.sydesy.com
|