[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev proposed revisions for gettext (II)
|
From: |
Henry Nelson |
|
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev proposed revisions for gettext (II) |
|
Date: |
Tue, 1 Dec 1998 10:00:04 +0900 (JST) |
To Tom: I'll be working up a new patch for the LYPrint.c proposed mods,
so don't apply that one. As a couple of people have pointed out,
corrupting the original English is not acceptable, so I won't be doing
the "page(s)" thing, etc.
I think the patch to INSTALLATION might as well be applied now so that
new people working with the dev version won't start rummaging around
LYMessages_en.h.
> > "Print options" displayed _three_ times. If my modifications are too
> > verbose, then I would propose that that particular string be removed
> > completely just above the listing in advanced user mode, as is the
> > "Local additions" message below.
>
> I support your proposition and I suggest also removing the TITLE
> from the Print, Download and Options(forms) menus, and from the
> List, History and Visited Links pages. Those can't be bookmarked
> anyway. Well, the
This is getting a little bit away from my immediate goal, but I have
felt the same thing that I think you are expressing here, i.e., the
TITLE and H1 headline for each of these pages is the same, except that
the headline contains the current version.
What I've thought would be better, would be to put everything into the
<TITLE> string, i.e., include the title and Lynx version number at the
very top right of the screen, and remove the headline altogether. That
would add two more lines to the page; nice for those of us who have lots
of options and want them all on a single page.
The actual html would change from:
<head>
<title>Printing Options</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Printing Options (Lynx Version 2.8.2dev.7)</h1>
<pre>
to:
<head>
<title>Printing Options (Lynx Version 2.8.2dev.7)</title>
</head>
<body>
<pre>
What do people think about this? I won't be combining the two topics of
formatting internal pages and adjusting gettext strings, and if I do end
up doing both, they'll come over as two separate patches so they don't
get confused.
> > realize a difference between the two. I thought rather than parrot
> > "options" another time, I'd give at least a hint of what was going
> > to happen if they hit the enter key on one of the options.
>
> What about telling them to read the help files, which are one
> keystroke from them? The Download and Print options are explained
> there.
Actually, the person who did the reorganizing of the pages and the
gzipped help pages originally had a link (or at least the idea of making
a link) to the appropriate section of the help file. I think having
that link, in Novice mode only, would be worthwhile. I hate to get
distracted from the gettext stuff, but I'll take a look to see if the
code is still there and just not being used, and if I can't find it,
I'll try to find the original patches. I think it originally got shot
down because it was put on all pages regardless of the user mode. Also
there was some disagreement as to where it should be, top or bottom of
the page.
But to get back to the gettext modifications, I think I would like to
go with my original idea of giving a brief discription of the action to
be taken, although ONLY in Novice mode, so in Advanced and Intermediate
you'll get a concise listing. So my question, are there better ways to
say:
"Print" actions to take on the rendered document:
Locally configured "Print" actions to take on the rendered document:
A question for Jim, should we as Ismael suggests make the above two
individual msgids, or should we try to separate and recycle them? If
"actions to take on the rendered document" and "Locally configured" were
the msgids, theoretically they could be used in other situations, the
latter for example in the D)ownload menu.
> I was giving it just as an example of a language that doesn't
> necessarily use just an "s" for plural forms, but it's possible to
> have a Latin version
Yes, it was a good example.
Sorry for these long messages. Once I get my feet on the ground and
understand what everyone wants, I think I'll be able to shut up and just
do it.
__Henry
- Re: lynx-dev proposed revisions for gettext (II),
Henry Nelson <=