Home/ Questions/Q 115277
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-11T02:59:37+00:00

Background A project installs some files that contain all the elements to define a

  • 0

Background

A project installs some files that contain all the elements to define a UserControl – some user source, a CodeCompileUnit for designer code, and a resx file. At runtime, these files are compiled into an assembly and the classes are consumed by our main application (the assembly is only updated when necessary).

Question

The project has to be globalized and as part of that process, there is a need to provide localizations of these files. Two options are either to allow the inclusion of additional resx files for different locales (either within the same files or as additional side-by-side files) that can be compiled into a satellite assembly for the main assembly, or to provide a copy of each full file for each supported language, compiling the appropriate set for the language being supported.

  • Does anyone have any other options that might be worth considering?
  • What problems might be inherent in either of the solutions I’ve proposed?

Constraints/Disclaimer
I am aware that the scenario is less than ideal and that better choices could’ve been made in some areas (like globalizing from the start), but they cannot be changed at this point in the project. I appreciate any advice, solutions, or leads you can provide. Thanks.

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Create a separate satellite assembly for each culture. This has two benefits:

    • You can build all of the assemblies in one go, and have a definitive file for each version number and filename combination, rather than it also depending on the culture.
    • You can have multiple assemblies in the same installation, and base the language to use on the system language, or a user preference etc. This will make development and testing significantly easier, as you won’t need to keep rebuilding and copying files around just for the sake of changing languages.
    • It’s how .NET i18n is designed to work. While I’m not an expert on .NET i18n (‘read Guy Smith-Ferrier’s book’ is my best advice!) I generally find that frameworks work best when you follow their expected model.

    Even if the final part of ‘building the satellite assembly’ is done at runtime (can you do it at install time instead?) you still get the second and third bullet advantages at least. It also means that if you ever do go the more normal route of supplying the satellite assemblies to start with (instead of building them on the user’s box) you’ll have less to change.

    Apologies if I’ve misunderstood the question though…

    • 0