44581 - Cookies prefs need some text rewrite

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(Core :: Networking: Cookies, defect, P3)

Description

[Blake Ross]

I don't mean to be picky, but there's some confusing text in Prefs > Advanced > 
Cookies and Images.

It reads: 

"Cookies are small pieces of information that websites store on your computer.  
This allows them to customize their websites to suit your individual 
preferences."

In saying this allows "them," the only thing that "them" could refer to are the 
websites themselves.  Thus, in essence, we're saying: "This allows the websites 
to customize their websites" which, of course, makes little sense.  By 
saying "them" and "their," we act like we've referred to a person or persons 
previously, but we haven't.

simone, vera: any suggestions?

Comment 1

[Stephen P. Morse]

Obvious fix is:

   customize their websites -> customize their web pages

Fix checked in.  Changed file is 
xpfe\components\prefwindow\resources\locale\en-US\pref-cookies.dtd

Comment 2

[Blake Ross]

...is that really all that much better?

Comment 3

[Matthew T (active 1999-2002)]

No, it's not much better.

Since millions of people are going to be looking at this, let's get *really* 
picky ... (sincere apologies in advance to whoever wrote the original text:-)

> Cookies are small pieces of information

Usually it's not information; usually it's just data, and the information itself 
is stored on the Web server. We can safely say that the cookie contains data 
(since all information is data), but we can't safely say that it contains 
information (since not all data is information).

>                                         that websites

It's not Web sites which send cookies, but Web servers. (If I have a site on 
tripod.com, it's not my site which sends you all those cookies, it's the server.)

>                                                        store on your computer.

It's not a foregone conclusion that the cookies get stored on the computer -- 
otherwise these prefs wouldn't exist in the first place.

> This allows them to customize their

This is what Blake was complaining about, and remains unchanged.

>                                     web pages

Please, it's `Web pages', not `web pages'. TimBL didn't invent just any old web, 
he invented the Web. It's the WWW, not the WWw.

>                                               to suit your individual

`Individual' is redundant.

> preferences.

Sometimes that, but often it's just to track where you've been. And some people 
don't like that, which is why we bother including these prefs in the first place. 
The wording, as it currently stands, would leave new users wondering `well, why 
on earth *wouldn't* I want to accept all cookies?'.

So, how about this.
------
Cookies are small pieces of data that Web servers send to be stored on your 
computer. Web sites may use cookies to remember your preferences for viewing the 
site, or to keep track of which pages you visit on that site, or both.
------

The only inaccuracy I think I've left is using `which pages you visit' rather 
than `which files you access', but the 99% case for visiting a Web site is 
viewing HTML documents (pages) rather than non-HTML files, so I think the greater 
clarity is worth the inaccuracy.

Is that better, Blake?

Comment 4

[Stephen P. Morse]

Reassigning.

Comment 5

[Blake Ross]

And now I see why Matthew is the UI QA :)

I'll be gone for three weeks at Duke starting tomorrow.  Will revisit this issue
(and give some more in-depth comments) when I return...

Comment 6

[Blake Ross]

Matthew, thanks for the breakdown.  Your writing is certainly an improvement.  
My thoughts about it:

>Cookies are small pieces of data 

For whatever reason, "small pieces of data" bothers me...it just sounds 
awkward.  Anything better we can do here?  Perhaps "bits of data"?  I agree it 
shouldn't say information, but "pieces of information" sounds a little better --
 now that you've replaced "information" with "data", it sounds a bit off.  
Could we rephrase that somehow?

>that Web servers send to be stored on your 
>computer. 

Agreed that web should be capitalized.  Another bug should be filed, however, 
to be consistent in other places (many of the prefs, for example, use a 
lowercase "w" for Web)

>Web sites may use cookies to remember your preferences for viewing the 
>site, or to keep track of which pages you visit on that site, or both.

My previous comments were just a result of my pickyness (am I creating words 
now?) but this sentence really bothers me...it kind of trails on, and it 
overuses "or".  Once again, however, I'm having trouble coming up with better 
wording.  Do we wish to shy away from "and/or" ?

I also agree that, as this will be viewed by millions, we should take our time 
with it.

Comment 7

[Matthew T (active 1999-2002)]

* If we really wanted to be sticklers for grammar, we could say that cookies were
  `small data'. (Go look up `datum' in a dictionary ...)
* For `pieces of data' (too technical?) and `pieces of information' (too
  inaccurate) we could use:
  - bits of text
    o highly accurate, if a bit prosaic
  - records
    o accurate, but not very precise
  - tags
    o inadvisable, since `tags' are overused in Internet terminology already
  - dockets
    o a good metaphor, but the interface (as opposed to the on-line help) isn't
      really the place for metaphors.
  ... I guess we're stuck with `bits of text', then.
* I made a silly mistake: `Web sites [plural] ... the site [singular] ... that
  site [singular]'. Duh.
* My text is inaccurate in that it uses `computer' to mean `profile'. But that's
  something that's done in numerous other places in Mozilla, and we won't be able
  to make it more accurate -- without introducing confusion -- for another three
  or four years at least, until the idea of `profiles' becomes better known.
* To shorten the second sentence, we can probably drop the `or both', and rely on
  users to make the assumption (or to refer to the Help) if they want the
  details.

So:
------
Cookies are small bits of text that Web servers send to be stored on your 
computer. A Web site may use cookies to remember your site preferences, or to 
keep track of which pages you visit on the site.
------

Comment 8

[verah (gone)]

Accepting.

I'm just begin to read this (been on vacation), and I'll get back to it later, 
but I want to note one thing. "Web" is capitalized only when one is referring to 
"the Web." The word "web" in all of these and any similar compound nouns is not 
capitalized:

web pages
web sites (should always be two words)
web browsing
web server

This is the style for Netscape, Apple, Microsoft, etc. -- in other words, the 
commonly adopted style.

We'll be doing a UI text cleanup & polish in a later cycle, and I'll be sure 
this dialog gets some attention. Thanks!

Comment 9

[Matthew T (active 1999-2002)]

Sorry, Vera, I have to disagree with your claim that web with a small w (except 
for the Web /per se/) is `the style for Netscape, Apple, Microsoft, etc. -- in 
other words, the commonly adopted style'.

* Communicator 4.x uses the style you describe in its online help -- though since
  it Uses Old-Style Title Case in its Headings (`Adding Pictures (Images) to Your
  Web Page', etc), the style isn't obvious. Netscape does not follow this style
  on its own Web site, however: its promotional material uses a capital `W' (e.g.
  `renders Web pages quickly' and `translates Web pages in one click' in
  <http://home.netscape.com/newsref/pr/newsrelease805.html>), while its developer
  documentation uses `web' even when referring to the Web by itself (e.g.
  <http://developer.netscape.com:80/docs/manuals/tools/intro/startch1.htm>).

* Apple uses `Web page', `Web browser', `Web site', and `Web server'
  consistently throughout Mac Help (as supplied with Mac OS). In *no place* in
  the Help does it ever use `web'.

* Microsoft uses `Web page', `Web browser', `Web site', and `Web server'
  consistently throughout their Knowledge Base (e.g.
  <http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q260/9/71.ASP>), promotional
  material (e.g. <http://msdn.microsoft.com/osig/ie/ielogo.asp>), and training
  (e.g. <http://msdn.microsoft.com/training/free/chapters/mwf/mts1000189.htm>). I
  can find *no place* where they use a small `w' for any of these (though their
  site is so large that I might be wrong).

* At which step along the following do you stop using a capital W?
  browsing the Web --> Web browsing --> Web browser --> Web server

* Following your Web/web logic would give the following results if applied to
  other proper names:
  - Apple
  - apple machines
  - apple Macintosh
  - apple macintosh users
  - Microsoft
  - microsoft FrontPage
  - microsoft frontPage documents
  - Ford
  - ford cars
  etc.

Comment 10

[verah (gone)]

Sorry, my decision stands. Since I'm one of the principal tech writers at 
Netscape, and was one at Apple, and participated in writing the style guides at 
both places, I'm in a good position to know what the official style is. That 
doesn't mean we always abide by the style, but in the UI text and online Help, 
where I'm involved, we will.

Here's the paragraph from the Netscape Style Guide that concerns this:
"web/Web (Use lowercase for all general references and for internal networks; 
use uppercase only when referring specifically to the World Wide
Web. See also World Wide Web)"

Marking M20.

Comment 11

[josh]

> Here's the paragraph from the Netscape Style Guide that concerns this:
> "web/Web (Use lowercase for all general references and for internal networks; 
> use uppercase only when referring specifically to the World Wide
> Web. See also World Wide Web)"

Isn't Mozilla referring specifically to the World Wide Web?

Comment 12

[Blake Ross]

I guess I agree with Vera, to a certain extent.  It's not really referring 
directly to _the_ World Wide Web (as it would be if it was saying, for 
example, "when xxx invented the World Wide Web").

Comment 13

[johng]

Vera, do you think there are any remaining important issues from a usability or
clarity point of view?  If so, please nominate nsbeta3

Comment 14

[Matthew T (active 1999-2002)]

The wording has been changed, so two of the original problems are gone, but the 
rest still stand:
* it still incorrectly refers to `information' instead of `data' (or `text');
* it still incorrectly says that cookies get `stored on your computer', seemingly
  making the very existence of the prefs pointless;
* it still incorrectly refers to `sites' instead of `servers'; and
* it still doesn't even follow Netscape's house style w.r.t `web sites' (let
  alone following an internally consistent style:->).

Comment 15

[verah (gone)]

Okay, I've made a decision. Here's how the description in the Cookies 
Preferences dialog should read:

"Cookies are small bits of information that some web sites ask to store on 
your computer. If you enable cookies, your browser will accept a web site's 
cookies automatically when you visit the site. Such cookies are sent back to the 
web site on future visits."

Steve, sorry to change my mind... but could you please change the "Understanding 
Privacy" button to "More Information"? This matches what we're doing in the 
Smart Browsing preference dialog, and (now that I see the dialog) I think it 
makes more sense in this context.

I've chosen to stay with the terms "information" and "web site" because I want 
to avoid making the dialog sound really techy. This subject scares users enough 
without adopting a formal, technical tone. I'm afraid that "data" and "server" 
would give the dialog such a tone.

Also, there are still several Internet-related terms that users don't recognize. 
I think it's safe to assume that people are beginning to know what a "browser" 
is (though I'll bet at least 50% still don't). But "client" and "server" are 
still fuzzy, undefined words for most normal people. As I commented in bug 
50496, in this instance I think a slight (and harmless) inaccuracy yields 
greater clarity. People know what a web site is. If we tell them that cookies 
are set by "servers," we're throwing them a curve ball.

"Data" and "information" are both correct here. I'm breaking the usual rule by 
choosing the longer word, but "information" is softer.

"Smalls bits of information" is how we describe cookies elsewhere in our 
documentation.

The More Information button will point to a document that contains an extensive 
glossary. The glossary defines (among other things) "web site," "server," 
"host," etc., etc. (I'm adding definitions even as I write this, so if you don't 
see them all initially, stay tuned.) Also, the relationship between servers, 
domains, web sites, and web pages is made clear in the document. We can't really 
explain it all in a dialog box.

Steve, I'm reassigning this back to you for a final decision and fix/close. 
Thanks!

Comment 16

[verah (gone)]

P.S. Removing [NEED INFO] from the status whiteboard. John, I don't think this 
needs to be nominated for nsbeta3.

Comment 17

[jglick]

Steve, would you mind if I take this bug from you?  I am fixing a bunch of text 
cleanup stuffs.  Thanks, jglick.

Comment 18

[jglick]

OK, to summarize, these are the changes recommended by Vera:

1. Change descriptive text to: "Cookies are small bits of information that some 
web sites ask to store on your computer. If you enable cookies, your browser 
will accept a web site's cookies automatically when you visit the site. Such 
cookies are sent back to the web site on future visits."

2. Change the "Understanding Privacy" button to "More Information".

Comment 19

[Stephen P. Morse]

Take it with my blessings  ;-)

Comment 20

[hangas]

Marking nsbeta3+ since jglick has this bug fix in hand.

Comment 21

[Blake Ross]

jennifer checked this in...

Comment 22

[Tom Everingham]

verif. 
WinNT 2000092111
Mac 2000091904
Linux 2000092008