From kde-core-devel Tue Dec 04 22:25:56 2001 From: Corrin Lakeland Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:25:56 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: Too technical terms in PO's X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=100751457629854 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > > > > "KSuperApp Error code: 12345" > > > That's helpful how? > > > At least I could've searched Google for cryptic messages. > > > error numbers are horrible > Agreed; a text on screen is there for the user, not the developer. The problem with this is that error messages occur when something goes wrong. Normally there are all sorts of nice concepts you can use to explain things things to the user, you share a `world view' in UI speak. When something goes wrong this world view breaks down and you've got two jobs: 1) Tell the user something screwed up, maybe with enough information for the user to avoid the problem 2) get information to the developer for a bug report. Giving the user enough information to avoid the problem is tricky. Sometimes the developer can guess a likely reason ``check file permissions'' but in generally error conditions occur when the program enters a state the developer considered impossible. > The principle is simple; the user does not have to know much to be able > to use a computer This is fine for normal strings, but breaks down for error strings. > > "Checking this box lets KDE to use shared memory for image to pixmap > > conversions." > > People don't care about the technical talk; > > Someone know why it is 'nice' to use shared mem for this? Is it faster? > Does it mean the memory load is less? What? Be careful about hiding the facts though. I really _HATE_ check boxes that say things like "Clicking this makes the program go faster". If it makes the program go faster why isn't it always on? Obviously there is a downside. Those of us who do know what shared memory is (say 10% of linux users?) would prefer the technical string. How about giving both? A brief correct string and then a long understandable version? Corrin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8DU16i5A0ZsG8x8cRAsfoAJ4+2Utqep6vSsRBBLWhaYwDmRl5FQCeKtBs NV2gzm/iWXcsJuKajNjslKg= =G0T9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----