Closed
Bug 1158361
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
Improve the localized messages in about:serviceworkers
Categories
(Core :: DOM: Core & HTML, defect)
Core
DOM: Core & HTML
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla40
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox40 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: ehsan.akhgari, Assigned: baku)
References
Details
Attachments
(2 files, 2 obsolete files)
3.26 KB,
patch
|
ehsan.akhgari
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
1.94 KB,
patch
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
See bug 1133601 comment 21. Andrea, can you take this, please? Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(amarchesini)
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → amarchesini
Flags: needinfo?(amarchesini)
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•9 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8597954 -
Flags: review?(splewako)
Comment 2•9 years ago
|
||
+ni:flod > -# LOCALIZATION NOTE the terms "AppId" and "InBrowserElement" should not be translated. > -b2gtitle = Firefox OS AppID %S - InBrowserElement %S > +# LOCALIZATION NOTE: %1$S is brandShortName, %2$2 is the appID, and $%$3 is true/false value. > +b2gtitle = %1$S AppID %2$S - InBrowserElement %3$S Nice, but is "appID" the same as "App ID", details_manifestURL allowed for translation from http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/annotate/9c22b105b0e3/browser/locales/en-US/chrome/browser/devtools/webide.dtd#l95
Flags: needinfo?(francesco.lodolo)
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
Yes, they should both refer to the same thing. Perhaps we should use a consistent name in both places.
Comment 4•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8597954 [details] [diff] [review] l.patch Review of attachment 8597954 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Then "application ID"/"app ID" form would be much better I think.
Attachment #8597954 -
Flags: review?(splewako)
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•9 years ago
|
||
Do you mean like this?
Attachment #8597954 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8597997 -
Flags: review?(splewako)
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
Then probably we want to have "InBrowserElement" as "Is a Browser Element"
Comment 7•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Andrea Marchesini (:baku) from comment #6) > Then probably we want to have "InBrowserElement" as "Is a Browser Element" I assumed that InBrowserElement is property name and don't remember seeing it earlier in l10n files. If "Is a Browser Element" then what false would mean? External element, web page element? Some other, unspecified element? Wouldn't boolean status look strange on the end? I would probably leave it as it is.
Comment 8•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8597997 [details] [diff] [review] l.patch Review of attachment 8597997 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- (In reply to Andrea Marchesini (:baku) from comment #5) > Do you mean like this? Yes, f+ (and clearing r? since I'm not reviewer)
Attachment #8597997 -
Flags: review?(splewako) → feedback+
Reporter | ||
Comment 9•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8597997 [details] [diff] [review] l.patch Review of attachment 8597997 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ::: toolkit/locales/en-US/chrome/global/aboutServiceWorkers.properties @@ +4,5 @@ > > title = Origin: %S > > +# LOCALIZATION NOTE: %1$S is brandShortName, %2$2 is the application ID, and $%$3 is true/false value. > +b2gtitle = %1$S Application ID %2$S - InBrowserElement %3$S I think we should keep InBrowserElement as is. But now the l10n note doesn't talk about it at all. @@ +31,5 @@ > > # LOCALIZATION NODE the term "Service Worker" should not translated. > unregisterError = Failed to unregister this Service Worker. > > +pushEndpoint = Push Endpoint: Not sure what changed here.
Attachment #8597997 -
Flags: review-
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•9 years ago
|
||
> > +pushEndpoint = Push Endpoint:
No new line at the end of the file.
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•9 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8597997 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8598028 -
Flags: review?(ehsan)
Reporter | ||
Comment 12•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8598028 [details] [diff] [review] l.patch Review of attachment 8598028 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ::: toolkit/locales/en-US/chrome/global/aboutServiceWorkers.properties @@ +4,5 @@ > > title = Origin: %S > > +# LOCALIZATION NOTE: %1$S is brandShortName, %2$2 is the application ID, and $%$3 is true/false value. > +# LOCALIZATION NOTE the term "InBrowserElement" should not be translated Nit: NOTE:
Attachment #8598028 -
Flags: review?(ehsan) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•9 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/842a5a968df8
Updated•9 years ago
|
Flags: needinfo?(francesco.lodolo)
Comment 14•9 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/842a5a968df8
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
status-firefox40:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla40
Comment 15•9 years ago
|
||
2.11 -b2gtitle = Firefox OS AppID %S - InBrowserElement %S 2.14 +b2gtitle = %1$S Application ID %2$S - InBrowserElement %3$S Next time please update the string ID. Unfortunately I was traveling so I didn't see the patch before it was too late.
Comment 16•9 years ago
|
||
> 2.11 -b2gtitle = Firefox OS AppID %S - InBrowserElement %S
> 2.14 +b2gtitle = %1$S Application ID %2$S - InBrowserElement %3$S
>
> Next time please update the string ID.
My bad, should notice that, sorry.
Attachment #8598805 -
Flags: review?(ehsan)
Comment 17•9 years ago
|
||
Sorry I did not noticed this bug before. We are not using these strings on b2g, so we can probably remove any b2g specific string. The reasons is because we cannot load a chrome page on b2g, so we have to reimplement the about:serviceworkers UI there. The work required for that is tracked in bug 1155758.
Reporter | ||
Comment 18•9 years ago
|
||
I'm now completely lost... Can someone who knows that we're exactly trying to achieve please file a _new_ bug, say exactly what we need to do, and CC me and :baku there? I'd like to avoid making any other changes before knowing what we're trying to achieve here. Thanks!
Reporter | ||
Comment 19•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8598805 [details] [diff] [review] follow-up patch Review of attachment 8598805 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- We can take this patch in the new bug if we decide to keep these strings. Sorry for the back and forth, Stefan!
Attachment #8598805 -
Flags: review?(ehsan)
Updated•5 years ago
|
Component: DOM → DOM: Core & HTML
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•