Closed Bug 65480 Opened 20 years ago Closed 15 years ago

prefs advanced description wording

Categories

(SeaMonkey :: Preferences, defect)

defect
Not set
trivial

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: BenB, Assigned: prometeo.bugs)

References

Details

(Keywords: fixed1.8.0.1, fixed1.8.1, late-l10n)

Attachments

(2 files, 1 obsolete file)

Prefs Advanced:
Main pane:
"Checked items are automatically enabled when you visit web pages that use them.
If you uncheck an item, pages may load faster but some functionality will be
limited."

s/load faster/increase security or privacy/

Software Installation:
"Enable software installation. (You will be prompted for each update.)"

s/for/before/

Will attach patch. Matt, please r=.
Severity: normal → trivial
Keywords: review
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla0.8
Status: UNCONFIRMED → ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed: true
Oh, I'll add the following patch here, too:

Remove the brandname before "Internet Keywords" in the Smart Browsing pane.
Neither "Mozilla Internet Keywords" nor "Beonex Internet Keywords" makes sense -
this is Netscape-only stuff.
Attached patch Fix, version 1 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
In bug 55614 I suggest changing `Enable features which help to interpret web 
pages' to `Advanced options', and removing the meaningless and untrue `If you 
uncheck an item, pages may load faster but some functionality will be limited' 
string entirely.
Well, "some functionality will be limited" is very true and the user should be
aware of that.

Example: Many users (including a press reviewer) complained that they couldn't
install Java for Beonex Comm. (made availbale as add-on via a webpage), becaus
ethey were unaware that disableing "Software installation and updates" would
inhibit this. You can argue about the meaningfulness of that pref, but similar
problems could certainly arise with disabled JS.
Ok, but at the very least change `some functionality will be limited' to `some 
Web pages may not work as intended'. Having the word `functionality' in the UI 
is embarrassing.
> at the very least change `some functionality will be limited' to `some
> Web pages may not work as intended'.

Fine with me, but please add that to the other bug - I don't want to create new
patches.

> Having the word `functionality' in the UI is embarrassing.

Out of curiosity: What's wrong with it?
Nobody reviewd so far :-(, so I have to move to Mozilla 0.9. Please review!
Target Milestone: mozilla0.8 → mozilla0.9
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9 → mozilla0.9.1
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9.1 → mozilla0.9.2
matt@netscape.com, please review.
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9.2 → mozilla0.9.3
r=matt
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9.3 → mozilla0.9.4
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9.4 → mozilla0.9.5
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9.5 → mozilla0.9.6
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9.6 → mozilla0.9.7
Keywords: mozilla1.0
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9.7 → mozilla0.9.8
> Out of curiosity: What's wrong with [`functionality']?

<http://dack.com/web/bullshit.html>. Note that `content' is also in that list,
so your patch makes things worse rather than better.

Please just delete that sentence, because it's lying. If it was true that
`Checked items are automatically enabled when you visit content that uses them',
Mozilla would turn the prefs back on as soon as you turned them off, so it would
be useless to have them at all.

Please also delete the `Enable features that help interpret web pages' groupbox,
because that's lying as well -- Java doesn't help interpret Web pages, and FTP
password doesn't apply to the Web at all.
Patch as requested by mpt.
Attachment #22595 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment on attachment 72913 [details] [diff] [review]
"Death with dignity" for Advancec

r=walk84
Attachment #72913 - Flags: review+
> > Out of curiosity: What's wrong with [`functionality']?
> <http://dack.com/web/bullshit.html>.

mpt, this is no explanation, just somebody else claiming the same.

Christopher, can you please attach a diff -uw?
Do you want to take this?
not sure, what to do with this bug. choess, do you want to take it? should I
check in the patch?
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9.8 → ---
This bug seems to conflict with bug 117371. Should one be a dupe of the other?
Product: Browser → Seamonkey
*** Bug 117371 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Attached patch Updated patch.Splinter Review
Most of the previous patch does not apply anymore.
Fix the wording in smat_browsing and smartupdate pref panels to close this bug.
Attachment #209434 - Flags: review?(iann_bugzilla)
Comment on attachment 209434 [details] [diff] [review]
Updated  patch.

r=me, a=me for SM1.1, too late for SM1.0
Attachment #209434 - Flags: review?(iann_bugzilla)
Attachment #209434 - Flags: review+
Attachment #209434 - Flags: approval-seamonkey1.1+
Comment on attachment 209434 [details] [diff] [review]
Updated  patch.

okay, I've persuaded that it's not too big an issue so just need one more a= for SM1.0 plus needs the late-l0n keyword plus announcing.
Attachment #209434 - Flags: approval-seamonkey1.0?
Comment on attachment 209434 [details] [diff] [review]
Updated  patch.

a=me given the keyword and m.d.l10n shouting ;-)
Attachment #209434 - Flags: approval-seamonkey1.0? → approval-seamonkey1.0+
--> Giacomo.
Assignee: ben.bucksch → giacomo.magnini
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Keywords: late-l10n
Announced, please check this thing in and kill another bug (5 years old only!).
checked into trunk and both branches, thanks for fixing it!
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You could have removed "Internet Keywords" at the beginning of the sentence - it's already there in the header label :-P
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.