Localization recommendations

ufuk

MS announced that they won't localize NAV 2013 in Turkey so partners should do themselves. I'm trying to find the best method to localise the product and will get contact with MS to learn their approach but before that I want to hear your valuable contributions.

• Should I renumber localised objects to custom or partner range or leave them where they are? (I do not have a license allowing usage of localisation range yet and still not sure if MS will provide this?)
• Using localisation range without appropriate license requires lots of work in merging (copy changed part from 2013, apply to base, then import 2013 onto base using new>existing option etc.)
• I think I can merge versions without renumbering but not sure about the consequences of this in next version?
• Regarding upgrade processes, what will be the affects of above methods? (I'm pretty sure that renumbering localisation objects and fields can cause lots of work.)
• Affects of renumbering on translation?
• UidOffset usage recommendations?
• Other things you want to warn, recommend...

Thank you very much in advance.

lvanvugt

Hi Ufuk,

Isn't there a partner (or a couple of partners) that has been assigned by MS to do the localization? This is in general their way doing. It's called PLL - Partner Lead Localization (if om right). So it's not up to each partner to do that, but a PLL partner.

ufuk

Hi Luc,

We have been PLL partner and doing localisation until 2013 version. But MS announced that they won't release a localised version of 2013 in Turkey (announced Turkey will use W1 vers.) so we have to do this ourselves.

Thank you.

lvanvugt

Hi Ufuik,

That's bnew to me as I understood that PLL was to be strating from NAV 2013 on.

ufuk

I'm not sure about the concepts (PLL or what name we had?). We were the only partner that doing the localization till 2013, from now on the localization process has changed. You can do it yourself, cooperate with other partners or sell them your localization package.
By the way I created a request at Voice and looking forward to learn their approach. I think there should be similar countries and some people should already discussed this case.

Thank you.

lvanvugt

Ufuk,

I have no experience as PLL Partner, but I have been working in the MS Dynamcis NAV localization team (GDL) that existed till June 2009. From that experience my answers below:

ufuk wrote:

[*]Should I renumber localised objects to custom or partner range or leave them where they are? (I do not have a license allowing usage of localisation range yet and still not sure if MS will provide this?)

If you want to sell the localization I guess MS should grand you the rights to use the same range(s) as they did in the past. For sure it would be very strange to put in a customer range

ufuk wrote:

[*]Using localisation range without appropriate license requires lots of work in merging (copy changed part from 2013, apply to base, then import 2013 onto base using new>existing option etc.)

True; does your statement imply that you do not get an appropriate licens

ufuk wrote:

[*]I think I can merge versions without renumbering but not sure about the consequences of this in next version?

Yep, but only MS can tell you

ufuk wrote:

[*]Regarding upgrade processes, what will be the affects of above methods? (I'm pretty sure that renumbering localisation objects and fields can cause lots of work.)

Indeed a lot of work; not only the "coding"but also the testing and possible also upgrade work for existing customers who already use those features

ufuk wrote:

[*]Affects of renumbering on translation?

If you renumber objects the translation export will contain the same string having different ID. However if the renumberd objects did already contain both English and Turkish string (captions) this should not be anissue

ufuk wrote:

[*]UidOffset usage recommendations?

Make sure the UidOffSet aligns to the object range you are using

ufuk wrote:

[*]Other things you want to warn, recommend...

(1) What about Online Help? If you renumber your objects existing Online Help topics will not have been renumbered!
(2) Upgrade Toolkit

ufuk

Hi Luc,

Thank you for sharing your ideas.

For the Help concern, thank you for that because I completely missed it.
Upgrade Toolkit issue, what do you mean, I didn't understand this. (can renumbering cause a problem?)

As a result, I think, I shouldn't do a renumbering whether I have the appropriate license or not. I'm waiting for MS's reply and hope that they can provide a license allowing local range usage. Otherwise it will be a very hard work to accomplish.

lvanvugt

ufuk wrote:

Upgrade Toolkit issue, what do you mean, I didn't understand this. (can renumbering cause a problem?)

Indeed renumbering can cause a problem.
If you have an existing customer running a local(ized) feature containing tables that, with the renumbering action, you are going to renumber (or only fields that you'll renumber) then you have to migrate the data in these (old numbered) tables and fields to the new numbered tables and fields. With an add-on this is what you would need to deal with in the upgrade toolkit.
Clear?

ufuk

Clear, thank you. In fact, I'm aware of having to modify upgrade toolkit in order to allow a field mapping. But of course, this is a risky process and can cause performance issues.

lvanvugt

you're welcome

ufuk

Now it's clear.
We have to create our addon for localisation. So, all required localisation functionality should be moved to the partner range: a great news for a developer:D

I wonder if there are similiar countries and what do people think about this approach change?