With the attached file, containing some rules to handle non-translatables, you can instruct CafeTran to treat words with CamelCase as non-translatables, which are ignored during spell-checking:
Note, however that regular expressions like these in the list of non-translatables will cause that CafeTran can take quite some time to open largish projects. It looks likes it scans all segments for patterns that match the defined regular expressions.
You'll probably want to exclude the regular expressions when you don't need them. Or use different sets of non-translatables, e.g. per client.
One further note:
(Possibly this will slow down the opening of files even further.)
Would this be a default Hunspell option, by any means?
Amos: what's the pipe at the start of the line for?
It looks like the RegEx Maestro is not going to answer your question, so I'll give it a try.
[DISCLAIMER: I don't use tab del glossaries, nor do I use regexes. Not in CafeTran, that is]
The only reason for the pipe character to be there, is that CT knows you're using a regex in a tab del. That is, unless it's a tab del for regexes only, and you set it up that way.
I'm trying to set up a regex for a non-translatable of the form:
[word or words]
Can you give an example of what you're looking for? Words between square brackets? In that case, your regex seems to be OK for one word between brackets.
Amos: words between square brackets
Well, "words" (plural, all words) can be caught with:
So what I'm wondering is why "Task" -> "Transfer non-translatable segments to target" doesn't transfer these segments to the target.
Maybe the non-translatables file doesn't support regexes. But yes, do ask Our Beloved Leader, by all means. And please let us know His answer.
Maybe the non-translatables file doesn't support regexes
Or... My regexes include the brackets, whereas in real life, they may not be there. I can't think of a way to catch the words between brackets, and then make them recognised if there are no brackets. Not in CT anyway.
I assume the non-translatables file supports regexes, because that's what the other Hans' original post in this thread was about. Or have I got the wrong end of the stick entirely??