Re: Templates and all user intraction strings consistency
Quoting Joey Hess (joeyh@debian.org):
> So:
>
> Description: Format c:?
> You've picked the c: drive for your linux install. Now it must be
> formatted. This operation will destroy the data on your first hard drive.
>
> Not:
>
> Description: Formatting of drive
> You've picked the c: drive for your linux install. Now it must be
> formatted. This operation will destroy the data on your first hard
> drive. Format c:?
Looks like we fully agree on this (though your example first looks
strange because of the colon/question mark construction....)
> > -String templates (as well as Select/Multi-Select templates)
> > -the short form is a prompt and NOT a title. I follow Joey's wishes
> > about this and the planned/suggested modifications to cdebconf for
> > having it behave like debconf.
> > I prohibit question style prompts ("IP Address?") in favour of
> > "opened" prompts ("Adresse IP").
>
> That's interesting, it may not apply in English. I think if just
> prompting for a value, it does make sense to use the name of the value
> as the prompt. Sticking a question mark at the end does not make it a
> question. But "What is your IP address?" could also be appropriate.
Well, this is mostly a matter of consistency. Both forms (What
is....and direct prompt) are probably correct. However, especially for
the installer, we should have coherent things there.
Thus, we really should decide what to do.
The "What is your IP address?" form induces a problems, IMHO. As most
of you know, english is a very compact language. However most other
languages are more verbose, espcially french... :-)
Thus, for french, this gives :
Quelle est votre adresse IP ?
or
Adresse IP
In this example, this is not really a problem, but there are a lot of
other prompts where we already fight for fitting the french
translation in the recommended "50 characters or so...." so we don't
really need to add stuff like "Quel(le) est....blahblah".
> > I do NOT use colons at the end (but maybe should I??)
>
> I'm not sure about colons. They are unnecessary in the newt frontend,
> but may be necessary to separate the prompt from the text entry space on
> other frontends.
Discussion in debian-l10n-french currently is in favour of colons.
You mention the newt frontend. Where is it used ? I'm kinda lost in
all frontends.. :-). My own tests have been done on a i386 system
where it seems to me that a dialog-like frontend is used. Is this in
fact the newt frontend ?
If so, why do you mention that colons are unnecessary ? Is this
because the frontend automagically adds them ?
> I have some other stylistic points for the installer. I think it's a bad
> idea for a template in one part to refer to some action to be carried
> out later in some other part. For example, if dhcp fails, the dialog
> currently says something about 'at the main menu, select "detect
> hardware and load installer modules"'. This is annoying, both because
> that menu items has changed its name since this text was written, and
> because you're asking the user to remember what to do. Instead it could
> just do the action for the user.
Yes, definitely supported.
I also have other stylistic points, which apply to both d-i templates
and all other templates :
-the form should be as neutral as possible. Please try to avoid first
person usage ("I will do this"...."We detected that).
1st person makes templates look really....unprofessionnal. A computer
is not a living person. Remember that this is already discouraged for
init scripts.
Those of us who have already written scientific publications should
know what I mean.
-do not refer to specific interface widgets in templates
Joey and some others have already done lot of work on this topic. d-i
is not concerned anymore, I guess.
The common mistake here is "If you answer "Yes" " in boolean templates
long form.
As most of us know, debconf frontends do not always show the user with
a Yes/No choice, so this should definitely be abandoned.....and thus
mentioned in a document if this discussion finally leads to a
"Debconf templates writing guidelines" document.
>
> We should strive for putting enough information in the short
> description/prompts that the user does not need to read the whole long
> description to get the essense of the question. Because users will not
> always do that. So instead of this:
>
> Description: Do you want to do that?
> I can do a) b) c) d) e) ..
>
> Use:
>
> Description: Format hard drive, walk dog, do dishes, and achieve world peace?
Ahem. French translation :
"Formater le disque, promener le chien, faire la vaisselle et faire la
paix dans le monde ?"
I guess you have the point : don't put TOO MUCH things in the short
form because most translators will lose their last hair when trying to
fit all in their own translations.. :-)
> We should avoid unnecessary jargon and wordiness in a long description
> when we can, unless it is necessary to keep the meaning clear.
This has already been a choice for french team. There was for instance
some debate among us and among french-speaking developers about "geek"
language.
A good example is : "Should foo be SUID root ?".
This is OK for a short description and we have most often translated
this in short form to "Foo doit-il être « SUID root » ?". But in long
form we use :
"Foo peut être exécuté avec les droits du super-utilisateur pour faire
ci ou ça"
or
"Foo may be run with root privileges for doign this or that"
We, DD, are of course, for the most, long time geeks who live with a
computer in our head and thus, "suid root" is natural for us.
I must confess that this was not evident for me a few years ago, when
I tried to forget my earlier life in Microsoft
encironments... :-). So, please, avoid jargon as much as possible.
> I think we need to agree on such stupid stylistic matters as one space
> or two at the end of a sentence. I have my preferences, but making it
> consistent is more important.
*this* is an english-specific topic, for what I know. But should be
sorted as all tempaltes are first written in english. I must confess
that I don't really understand the need of this, but I will for sure
follow the natives recommendations. PLEASE avoid things like
"two-spaces for Britons and one space for US".. :-)
> We should agree on a voice for the installer to use. Some questions use
> "I will do this", some use "Do you want to do this". I prefer to not
> anthromorphise computer programs, and avoid the "I".
See above : I answered in your own message and thus did not see this before.
> We need to decide on a term to use for the installer itself in text
> displayed inside it. Should we call it "the Debian installer" and
> require big changes by other derived distributions, or should it be "the
> installer"? Or "the debian-installer"? I prefer the second of these.
Why not "Debian distribution installation" ? Maybe too long ?
"Debian installation"
"Debian" ? :-)
> We should decide on a term to use for udebs in the installer. Reports
> are that "installer modules" is confusing to users; it also leads to
> clunky phrases like "install installer modules". Or should that be
> "install Debian installer modules"? You see the problem. There has been
> a proposal to call them something else, I forget what.
"Installation program modules". Kinda long however and does not avoid
"Install installation program modules" which could however be replaced
by "Load installation program modules".
> We should have all the templates reviewed by native English speakers who
> are not developers of the installer. Distance lends perspective. I've
> cc'd the debian-i18n-english list. Since that list operates mostly by
> critiquing text sent to the list, we could, after we agree on our manual
> of style, send it to the list plus a few templates a day, for a few
> weeks.
Maybe should we first have a consensus on the templates style
(colons/no colons, phrases/no phrase), do a first cleaning of the
whole thing even by non-native speakers like myself, Denis,
others...or involved people like you and certainly a few others.
Then, try to involve d-l10n-english for final cleaning and polishing.
Meanwhile, translators will run after fuzzy strings.. :-). I'm
prepared.
Reply to: