Hi Jirka,

I'm not confident "para-virtualization can contain the entire kernel" explains the concept or difference between para-virt and full virt more clearly than its original wording. I'd suggest a total rewrite of the para-virtualization paragraph.

From my understanding (I could be wrong), the 'awareness' of the system about whether it's being virtualized might be a more important distinction to make here -- in full virtualization, the system 'thinks' it's running on bare metal, where in para-virtualization, the system is 'aware' that some components have been virtualized, as things that are virtualized are running in parallel to bare-metal functions. (Except perhaps with Xen, where the whole kernel may be running as a virtualized one -- which makes the definition more difficult to make).

In this case, I'd rather defer to the experts -- Jamie Bainbridge (from the SEG team) once explained para-virt vs. full virt to me in a really excellent and clear way, so I will add a needinfo for him. 

Jamie, would you mind helping us come up with a simpler/clearer explanation of these two concepts so we can edit what's in our guide in the following section?

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/Virtualization_Getting_Started_Guide/chap-Virtualization_Getting_Started-What_Is_It.html#sec-what_is_virtualization

Thanks so much,
Dayle

I like the description you just gave!

How simple/complex do we want to go?

What is the issue the translators are facing with the "encompass" phrase, so we can think of a different way to describe it?

Thanks for your input, Jamie. :) You're right -- I think we need to know more about what was originally problematic with "encompass", then we can decide how to improve it.

Jirka, what are your thoughts on the explanations above?

After looking at the docs, moving to verified.
Thank you Jaime and Jiri!
Best Regards,
Laura