Łukasz Wojniłowicz ha scritto:
>> I think without violating confidentiality, I can say that the CWG has
>> gotten multiple questions about this. I need some information. IF there is
>> a revert of the "ancient term" in to the "consistent" alternative, will
>> there be a revert war?
> 
> That would be another outbreak of violence. There is much of it already here 
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=404286
> 
> 
>> I also do not understand how this one word became a cause worth fighting
>> for.
> 
> For me it's a case of language correctness and purity.
> 
> The correctness is questioned by a linguist at
> https://sjp.pwn.pl/poradnia/haslo/poniechac;7346.html
> 
> One can see that "anuluj" was in fact used by macOS but in context of 
> reverting an action. Screenshots at
> https://aresluna.org/attached/terminology/articles/gryzieniejablek/pics/rys3
> 
> As Konrad Kostecki noted at
> https://marc.info/?l=kde-devel&m=158697228606229&w=2
> the alternative translation was also used by AmigaOS. It ranged from 2001 
> till 
> 2016.
> 
> Their dictionary can be downloaded at
> https://ato.exec.pl/files/slownik.lha
> 
> The alternative translation was also used by macOS from 1986 till 2006.
> Their dictionary can be viewed at
> https://aresluna.org/attached/terminology/glossaries/mac
> 
> AmigaOS and macOS are both niche OS. The translation was done by community.
> It's just like KDE. It can be considered niche OS and the translation is done 
> by community.

AmigaOS is a dead OS. macOS (which is not so niche anymore) changed, and that
should be considered as well.

> 
> The thing is, that some people see this translation as "absurd", "invalid", 
> "ancient" and I presume it is so because it's not what they've been 
> accustomed 
> to by the mainstream OS, which is Windows.

That's basically the most accepted translation for that term, sorry. It makes
sense for us to use it, and this has nothing to do with FLOSS and proprietary..


Let me ask clearly: if I commit the patch from
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=404286#c65

what will you do?

-- 
Luigi

Reply via email to