I recently got this failure from Sogeti:
“I have just seen that when installing the application on a device in English and changing the application to Spanish, the application language is not changed, however, when installing the application on a device neither in English nor in Spanish user is prompted to choose the language and if she/he chooses Spanish, the application is actually in Spanish. Then, since this behaviour is not in line with NOK-13 test case of Nokia Test Criteria, please send me an updated waiver for the one that is attached to this message, with different Functional Justification if needed.”
There are two main ways to do localization.
1. To load different resources on application startup. This is good because you can change the language dynamically, but bad because you have other language resource files cluttering up the phone memory.
2. The other way is to install different resource files at installation. This is good because the extra files are not installed.
For the non English/Spanish phone, it is the app installer's choice to show the dialog, nothing to do with our app.
Why would a Spanish user want an English version of the app? NOK-13 is saying that the second method now not allowed by Nokia (it has always been allowed before and is still allowed by other handset manufacturers). The Symbian SDK says the method we have used is the more typical choice. From http://www.symbian.com/developer/tec...2eLocalisation the sdk says
"More typically than installing all the resource files for all the available locales, you would only want to select a single resource file for installation, based on the system locale or user preference. The Symbian OS Installation System enables this, as described in ‘How to create an installation file for a multilingual application.’ "
So, this means NOK-13 is in contradiction to the OS design guidelines. We have used the OS preferred method of localization.
NOK-13 should be re-written/removed or the SDK should be changed to suggest the more resource hungry method should be used.
Until this is done we need a waiver to cover this.
More pointless paperwork! I understand the motivation behind most of the things that go on with Symbian signed (even if they are not in my best interests), but this is another example of a lack of common sense that seems to benefit nobody. Can anybody shed any light on this?