On Monday 30 June 2008 01:42, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Charles Plessy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > >> Maybe "Processing triggers" could be replaced by a 2-3 word summary of > > >> what the trigger is really doing? > > > > > > What about "Processing delayed configuration"? > > > > Well, I was originally thinking about someting specific for each > > trigger, but your proposition is probably sufficient and simpler to > > implement. > > We had the same problem when translating to French. > > A "trigger" is indeed pretty tricky to translate. The English word > gives a good feeling of "something that sets an action to be processed > later" so we settled on the french verb "déclencher" and we're using > "déclenchements" (quite word-for-word translation). > > But I indeed feel that few users have a good idea of what this might > be and the same probably stands for "triggers" in English (with the > extra fact that many users of English strings for dpkg are actually > non native speakers). > > I like "Processing delayed configuration". This is probably slightly > less precise but really clear of what this thing "Joe User will never > know about" is. > > We could use "delayed configuration" instead of "triggers" in messages > meant to be displayed to users while we could keep "triggers" in > internal messages. > > Before I mention this in the dpkg development list, are there any > other comments about that wording ?
From a "Joe User" perspective, I think delay rather misses the point. The reason for triggers is not to do stuff later, it's to consolidate processing so actions don't need to be done multiple times. Delay is the mechanism chosen for doing this. I think it you substitute delayed with consolidated it, at least in English, is accurate and carries the correct connotation that a user would more likely understand. Scott K -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
