| Summary: | RFE: Improve the [CopyTrans] options page, for clarity and accommodating the review feature | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] Zanata | Reporter: | Ding-Yi Chen <dchen> | ||||||
| Component: | Component-UI | Assignee: | Luke Brooker <lbrooker> | ||||||
| Status: | CLOSED UPSTREAM | QA Contact: | Zanata-QA Mailling List <zanata-qa> | ||||||
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||||
| Priority: | unspecified | ||||||||
| Version: | 3.0 | CC: | aeng, camunoz, djansen, lbrooker, sflaniga, zanata-bugs | ||||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||
| Last Closed: | 2015-07-31 01:24:37 UTC | Type: | Bug | ||||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
|
Description
Ding-Yi Chen
2013-05-27 06:36:25 UTC
Created attachment 753730 [details]
Copy Trans screenshot
Current copy trans screenshot
Created attachment 755125 [details]
Proposed future mockup of copy trans options
This is an idea of what we could do to simplify the copy trans option screen.
Let me know if I am missing something or this doesn't make sense.
That's an improvement on what we've got now. Unless I'm missing something, it's just a better way of presenting exactly the same options, so it shouldn't be difficult to implement.
But, really, it's still far too complex to explain, to test, to implement. We need something that doesn't have as many options. We should make a small number of copytrans profiles which cover normal cases. Something along these lines:
1. Software (eg gettext, properties)
Context must match, soft-reject otherwise
Doc id must match, soft-reject otherwise
2. Software (temporarily ignore doc name due to refactoring)
Context must match, soft-reject otherwise
Doc id need not match
Project must match, soft-reject otherwise
3. Documentation
TBD
Plus a small number of flags, eg:
1. Copy rejected matches (as Translated for reviewable projects, as Fuzzy for non-reviewable)
2. Copy translations from other projects as Translated
3. Copy translations from other projects as Fuzzy
I still think we should allow for detailed customization of the process (Just recently we were able to use copy trans to reuse translations in a very creative way for one of the projects). But I like the idea of the "predefined" configurations for copy trans. So what if we offer some way to automatically make the right selections for "Software", "Documentation", and "Software (ignore doc name)" for the common cases. We could even hide the "advanced" options until the user specifically asks about them. BTW, I think Luke's mockup is a great way of conveying the process. This has been iterated on for the new project screen. A mockup can be seen here: http://assets-zanata.rhcloud.com/master/projects/mortal-kombat/settings/#tab-vertical-3 I think this can still be improved in the future, but further improvements I have thought of would need more backend changes which can not be included this sprint. Migrated; check JIRA for bug status: http://zanata.atlassian.net/browse/ZNTA-488 |