Holger Wansing wrote:
> Justin B Rye <justin.byam....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In other words
>>
>> You can select the priority of question you want to see:
>> - 'critical': only questions that are essential for a successful
>> installation
>> - 'high': also questions for which the default often needs to be changed
>> - 'medium': also questions for which the default sometimes needs to be
>> changed
>> - 'low': all questions, even if the default only rarely needs to be
>> changed
>>
>> Or perhaps putting some words back in:
>>
>> Please select the questions you want to be shown by priority level:
>> * "critical": only show questions that are essential for a successful
>> installation;
>> * "high": also show questions for which the default often needs to be
>> changed;
>> * "medium": also show questions for which the default sometimes needs to
>> be changed;
>> * "low": show all questions, even if the default only rarely needs to be
>> changed.
>
> What worries me here is, that the description for high, medium and low only
> differs
> in just ONE word/term ("often", "sometimes", "only rarely").
>
> I fear that users might get overstrained with finding the difference within
> the
> lines... ?
I don't know about you, but for me it's easier to find important
differences when everything else stays constant than when they're
hidden among various unimportant differences.
>> Some alternatives that people might like more than I do:
>>
>> Please select the cutoff level for questions that you want to be asked:
>> * "critical": only show questions that always require user attention;
>> * "high": also show ones for which the default often needs changing;
>> * "medium": also show ones for which the default sometimes needs changing;
>> * "low": show all questions, even if the default only rarely needs
>> changing.
>>
>>>> "For example, this question is of medium priority, and if your priority
>>>> were "
>>>> "already 'high' or 'critical', you wouldn't see this question."
>>>>
>> [...]
>>>> For example, this question is of medium priority, and if your actual
>>>> priority
>>>> would be 'high' or 'critical', you wouldn't see this question.
>>
>> (I think that's a false-friend use of "actual". and it's definitely an
>> unidiomatic "would", though personally I wouldn't use "were" either.)
>>
>> I don't like this idea that it's "my" priority that's "high". It
>> isn't even the installer's priority - it's the degree of filtering
>> applied to questions in *terms* of priority, and that's a horrible
>> thing to have to explain concisely. Maybe we can just say:
>>
>> For example, this question is of medium priority, so if you had chosen
>> to see
>> only questions of 'high' or 'critical' priority, it wouldn't be shown.
>
> That sounds good to me.
(Oh, would it be more consistent to put "medium" in quotes too? How
are translators going to handle this?)
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
