Hi Luca, On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 11:19:13PM +0100, Luca Brivio wrote: > Some minor notes and corrections follow. > > - line 147 quantify CDs and DVDs Debian ships on
You mean DVD numbers are missing? > - line 199, 260: should "Desktop", "Standard" tasks be somehow tagged? No. > - line 208: "file systems" (only here; "filesystem" is used 4 times) Good catch. > - line 268: "up to $FIXME$ languages" -> does "up to" make sense? Probably not. Removed. > - line 340: "If you see display problems in the installer, you can try > booting the installer" -> somebody might find this ugly! I don't understand this. > - line 439: "The upgrade has a few preconditions; you should check them > before actually executing the upgrade." -> same as above ? > - line 469: "Would download/install/remove packages." -> what does this > mean? Indeed, it's a funny aptitude string I do not understand either. > - line 1021, 1049, 1174, 1175: no particular tags for "linux-" etc. Hhm, yes. But the package names are incomplete so I do not change it for now. > - line 1006: "you must upgrade to (at least) the 2.4 series, better to a > 2.6 series" -> maybe parenthesis should be removed I think it is OK. > - line 1035: "'devfs'" -> "<tt/devfs/"? Strings are normally not marked with <tt>. > - line 1036: "using devfs" -> "using <prgn/devfs/"? Yes. > - line 1068: "the devices eth0 and eth1 refer" -> "<file/eth0/" etc.? Don't know, maybe ... > - line 1103: "at boottime" -> "at boot time"? OK. > - line 1128: "getty" -> "<tt>getty</tt>"? I think the current usage is OK. > - line 1147: "EFI boot option maintenance menu" -> "EFI <tt>Boot option > maintenance menu</tt>"? (looks clearer in translations) Is this string displayed verbatim by EFI? > - line 1153: "Acpi(HWP0002,700)/Pci(...)/Uart" in the path -> > <tt>Acpi(HWP0002,700)/Pci(...)/Uart</tt> in the path ? Maybe, but not yet changed. > - line 1164: "When you dist-upgrade" -> "When you > <tt>dist-upgrade</tt>"? > > - line 1182: "if you see '2.4.27-3-686'" -> as above? > > - line 1184: "use apt-cache" -> "use <prgn>apt-cache</prgn>"? Oh yes! > - line 1184 "You may also use apt-cache to see a long description of > each package" -> why not aptitude? > > - line 1321: "or we expose bugs somewhere else" -> not very > understandable, at least for me It should be save to replace "expose" with "find". Not (yet) changed. > - line 1341: "<prgn>shutdown -h</prgn>" -> "<tt>shutdown -h</tt>"? OK. Not very important, especially as both is rendered the same way and translators will get fuzzy strings but I agree! > - line 1342: "apm needs to be used" -> any tag for "apm"? I don't think so. There doesn't exist a tag for every string :-) > - line 1354: "There has been support added" -> "Support has been added"? Yes. > - line 1591: "the README file" -> "the <file>README</file> file" I'm not sure whether README or the README* collection should be used here. > - line 1615, 1616: "SSL", "ssl" -> "<tt/SSL/", "<tt/ssl/"? I have to confess that I do not understand this paragraph. > - line 1641: "mozilla products" -> "Mozilla products" Yes. > Moreover, sometimes <item>s in <list>s don't contain <p>s, sometimes > aren't even closed: is this correct? It is, using it is preferred, but ... Feel free to check wha I forget/did wrong ... Thanks, Jens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
