Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Spelling: Terminal emulator desc #609

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

comradekingu
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link
Member

@danirabbit danirabbit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the suggestions! In elementary OS we use the term "secondary click" instead of "right click", because it is device agnostic. Many users are using laptops with multitouch two-finger secondary clicking and for those users the term "right click" doesn't make sense

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@
<li>Zoom levels are now remembered per-tab</li>
<li>Also warn about multi-line pastes</li>
<li>Show text details in unsafe paste dialogs</li>
<li>Open Link option when secondary clicking</li>
<li>Open link options when right-clicking</li>
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As @danrabbit pointed out "secondary click" should be used. However the whole item is not very precise in meaning so if it is to be changed it might as well be improved. It refers to adding another option to the context menu shown when secondary-clicking on a hyperlink in the terminal text. I would suggest something like
<li>Add "Open in" option to the context menu of links</li>

@jeremypw
Copy link
Collaborator

Closing through lack of progress.

@jeremypw jeremypw closed this Aug 31, 2024
@comradekingu
Copy link
Contributor Author

comradekingu commented Aug 31, 2024

@jeremypw Missed this. Helps to ping if things have gone by the wayside.

Edit: There is a lot of "right click" in for example https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aelementary%2Fwebsite+right+click&type=code to get to.

What is the nomenclature for middle-click?

If you call what is usually "A" on a game controller the primary button it is also correct, but similarly there is no way for the user to know what is what on the thing right in front of them.

@jeremypw
Copy link
Collaborator

@comradekingu Please re-open if you wish this to be reconsidered. @danirabbit has some comments that have not been resolved so maybe ping her to discuss. I guess fixing questionable wording on old release notes may not be a high priority, but there are some valid points to be considered for subsequent releases.

@comradekingu
Copy link
Contributor Author

comradekingu commented Sep 7, 2024

@jeremypw I can't reopen it. I am not part of the org.

If you want it can then be reverted to "secondary-click" and the inconsistency and whatever middle-click is can be an issue for another day.

My thinking is that people having changed clicking over to the other side or use special equipment know about it.
That way mostly everyone else can figure out what side the clicking occurs from its naming.

Some 30 years of being exposed to computers doesn't mean I find "tertiary click" intuitive, but that is what I thought it was. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse_button

"Combine primary- and secondary-clicks to execute a tertiary click." is an example of something I propose very few people in the target audience would understand.

@lenemter lenemter reopened this Sep 7, 2024
@comradekingu comradekingu changed the title Spelling: Link, Terminal emulator desc Spelling: Terminal emulator desc Sep 7, 2024
@comradekingu
Copy link
Contributor Author

@lenemter Luckily the fixed description is all that is left after conflicts. :)

Copy link
Member

@danirabbit danirabbit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Generally, this isn't a great app description and that's not your fault at all. But I'm hesitant to say that these changes are enough of an improvement to break all the existing translations. Changing "which" to "that" feels like a pretty minor style thing and not really necessary or an improvement.

I would personally be more happy to merge something that was a much better description that would feel more obviously worth requiring all the re-translation. But I also am not gonna object if someone else feels like this is enough of an improvement to merge it

@comradekingu
Copy link
Contributor Author

@danirabbit
The translations aren't broken, they are just fuzzified.
I'll have a look to see what I can do.
At least we agree it wasn't at all good :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants