Clarify use of scope option instead of array

[afdev82]

Hi,

I had the following working code to get a translation:

message = I18n.t(['configurations.jobs.statuses.pending', status.config.last_job], {
  defaults: [{ scope: 'configurations.jobs.statuses.pending.default' }],
  job: jobName,
  status: status.config.job_status
});

Then I wanted to use always the scope option instead of interpolating strings or use the array syntax.
So I wrote it like this:

message = I18n.t(status.config.last_job, {
  defaults: [{ scope: 'configurations.jobs.statuses.pending.default' }],
  job: jobName,
  scope: 'configurations.jobs.statuses.pending',
  status: status.config.job_status
});

In case of a missing translation, the first code returns the translation using the defaults ('configurations.jobs.statuses.pending.default'), but the second code doesn't consider it and it returns the "missing translation" message instead.
What am I doing wrong here? I thought the scope option could be used instead of the array syntax to specify the scope, e.g.:

message = I18n.t(status.config.last_job, {
  scope: 'configurations.jobs.statuses.pending',
}

instead of

message = I18n.t(['configurations.jobs.statuses.pending', status.config.last_job])

Thank you for your support!

[PikachuEXE]

I think https://github.com/fnando/i18n-js/blob/v3/spec/js/translate.spec.js provides the test cases about scope option.
Is there any test case there (or in other spec files) describe your use case?
If not can you try to fork, add the test case, run locally & report back result?
I can take a look at fixing it when it can reproduced via test case(s).

[afdev82]

Done, thank you.

[PikachuEXE]

I have no idea if that's expected behaviour or a bug neither.
But having a test case making things easier to understand.

[PikachuEXE]

OK the CI run and failed for this test case: (Which is now much easier to be understood by me)

I18n.translate("monster", {
  defaults: [{ scope: "greetings.stranger" }],
  scope: "greetings"
});

I would expect the library is doing the following:

• scope: greetings & key: monster > lookup en.greetings.monster > missing
• try first default > scope: greetings.stranger & key: monster > lookup en.greetings.stranger.monster > missing
• return [missing xxx translation]

What do you think?

[afdev82]

I thought the two examples should be equivalent:

I18n.translate(["greetings", "monster"], {
  defaults: [{ scope: "greetings.stranger" }]
});

and

I18n.translate("monster", {
  defaults: [{ scope: "greetings.stranger" }],
  scope: "greetings"
});

Without the defaults option, they have the same behavior.
I would expect that:

• scope: greetings & key: monster > lookup en.greetings.monster > missing
• try first default > scope: greetings.stranger > lookup en.greetings.stranger > found
• return "Hello stranger!"

It's the same behavior of the first and the second example, I don't know why adding the scope option instead of the array syntax to specify the key should change that.
The first example doesn't use the key "Hello!" with the default scope, it just returns it.

I18n.translate("Hello!", {defaults: [{scope: "greetings.stranger"}]});

[PikachuEXE]

I think the scope in option might or might not have the same meaning as scope in defaults
And the question for me would be "if the option scope (e.g. greetings) should be applied to the scope in `defaults"

In this case I have no idea
@fnando ?