-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
Fix French translation. #2981
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Fix French translation. #2981
Conversation
🚀 Translation Verification Summary🔄 Reference Branch:
|
@miniupnp Please check your translation, there is a conflict in the translation |
4b40a04 has introduced a new translation for "redact (black out)" which is "censurer". I don't agree with the author. "Censurer" is an imprecise word. @Ludy87 How such dispute in the translation could be settled ? |
Sure "caviarder" is the more precise term, I was going for the more widely recognised term instead. I personnally don't think most people who want to redact their pdf know what "caviarder" mean but understand the concept of "censure", also, the french academia is a joke. Apart from that, I don't really care as long as it's consistent, and "rédiger" is clearly wrong. |
The "Office Québecois de la Langue Française" also lists "caviarder" :
"caviarder" is widely used in french press :
This verb is present in all major french language dictionaries : |
I'm going to rebase to fix the conflict anyway |
I already agreed with you that "caviarder" is the technically correct term. There is no need to pile up arguments (and arguments about Québecois belong in fr_CA, not fr_FR). All I'm saying is that being understood matters more than being technically correct. Granted it's not a significant population (maybe 10 people, all in IT or adjacent), no one to whom I presented stirling, knew what caviarder meant. Let's go ahead and merge your PR once it's rebased, there is no point in arguing about this. It's easy to prove you are technically correct, it's impossible to prove that the term caviarder is not useful for the majority of the tool user. |
redact (black out) => Caviarder/Caviardage thanks @ralmn
fd9d76e
to
6ec8aea
Compare
@bendem I'm a bit surprised to hear that nobody whom you presented Stirling-PDF knew what "caviarder" meant. Maybe if that word is not used much in Belgium, we could create add a fr_BE translation ? 😉 Anyway, this translation has been introduced in commit 0cb5a6c by @deraw more than 1 year ago and has not caused any issue as far as I know. Regards, Thomas |
Co-authored-by: Dylan Broussard <contact@deraw.dev>
I randomly stumbled on this issue and was very surprised to see caviar (as in sturgeon eggs) 😆 in a PDF tool. I suggest looking at what Adobe uses: https://www.adobe.com/fr/learn/acrobat/web/redact-pdf Other suggestions: |
Whats the takeaway from this PR, should it be merged or still waiting for some consensus |
I also disapprove the |
I feel like everybody is going to have an opinion. Let's keep the technical "caviarder" as the main tool title. Other words should be searchable (in tags?), the description could be clearer too, especially as to how manual and automatic are different (selection manuel dans le document vs occultation sur base d'une recherche textuelle).
|
Id like to follow example of other leaders in the space such as adobe, |
Just because it's used in the French press doesn't mean it's commonly used by people. I agree with @benji78. I don't know many people who use this term. I prefer to use "occulter"; it may not be the technical term, but more people will understand it. Also, removing close words is a bad idea (in |
redact (black out) => Caviarder/Caviardage
thanks @ralmn
Description of Changes
Please provide a summary of the changes, including:
Closes #(issue_number)
Checklist
General
Documentation
UI Changes (if applicable)
Testing (if applicable)