Add references to AddonTemplate localization guides

[abdel792]

Link to issue number

None

Summary of the issue

Documentation about add-on localization was recently added to the AddonTemplate repository. Relevant NVDA documentation pages did not yet reference these new resources.

Description of user facing changes

Added references to the AddonTemplate localization documentation for add-on authors and translators.

Description of developer facing changes

Developers and translators can now discover the add-on localization documentation directly from the NVDA documentation.

Description of development approach

Updated the following documentation pages to reference the localization guides recently added to the AddonTemplate repository:

• projectDocs/dev/addons.md
• projectDocs/translating/readme.md

This work follows feedback provided during the review of nvaccess/addon-dataStore#9671.

As part of that discussion, it was suggested that the NVDA documentation should reference the new add-on localization guides hosted in the AddonTemplate repository, replacing outdated references to the old TranslatingAddons wiki page.

Testing strategy

Verified that all added links point to the correct AddonTemplate documentation and that the modified Markdown renders correctly.

Known issues with pull request

None

Checklist

• This change only affects documentation.
• Documentation has been updated accordingly.
• All added links have been verified.
• Markdown formatting has been reviewed.
• No code changes are included in this pull request.

[nvdaes]

Thanks so much, @abdel792 . I think you haven't filled in the pull request template.
It contains several headers in markdown, as well as checkboxes to verify that contributors have thought about possible important questions, like thinking about different kind of users, documentation, etc. Even when this PR doesn't require these things, I think that you should create a PR using the template.
Generally I use GitHub CLI with the following command:

gh pr create

Then I am asked if I want to skip the template, or open the default editor to fill in the template. Then you can navigate with the cursor to locate the corresponding headings, like a summary, issue (in this case you can write None), and at the end you can mark all checkboxes by placing an x between brackets, like this: [x] Some provided text. In this way, you are reflecting that you considered the corresponding aspect, even when for this PR is not relevant.
Yoiou may want to close this and reopen a new want ensuring that you are using the PR template. In nvda/projectDocs, there is documentation about this template.

[abdel792]

Thanks for the explanation, @nvdaes.

I was aware of the PR template, but I assumed it wasn't required for a small documentation-only change like this one.

Since this is my first contribution to the official NVDA documentation, I'd rather follow the expected process. I'll try closing and reopening the PR so that I can recreate it using the standard template and ensure everything is presented as expected.

[abdel792]

Thanks for the guidance, @nvdaes.

I have now restored the branch, reopened the PR, and updated the description to use the standard NVDA pull request template, including the required sections and checklist.

Thank you for pointing me to the documentation and for explaining the expected process. Since this is my first contribution to the NVDA documentation, I wanted to make sure I follow the project's conventions correctly.

Please let me know if there is anything else that should be adjusted.

[nvdaes]

@abdel792 , for me this is right. Perhaps, in user facing changes, I would have writen "None", since NVDA users won't see changes unless they download the source code, but I think we have a chance to express ourselves with certain flexibility, even when we follow conventions. Let's see what NV Access reviewers say about this. I'll approve this PR as an orientative consideration, though just approvals by owners are considered for merging the PR.

[nvdaes]

Thanks @abdel792

[abdel792]

Thanks @nvdaes,

I've just updated the Description of development approach section to add some context about the origin of this change.

In particular, I referenced the discussion in nvaccess/addon-dataStore#9671, since this PR is a direct follow-up to the suggestion made by @seanbudd to replace the outdated add-on localization references with links to the new AddonTemplate localization guides.

Thanks again for your review and guidance.

[seanbudd]

Thanks @abdel792