On Wednesday, January 25, 2012 3:56:55 AM UTC+11, Cédric Krier wrote: > > On 17/01/12 07:30 -0800, Okko Huisman wrote: > > > > > > I have doubts about the usage of the word State to express the phase in > the > > workflow. State is also used as the province of a country. > > If I read the book from Len Silverston, state is only mentioned in > regards to > > the province of a country. Status is the only word he uses to express > the > > condition of Sales and Invoice. > > Good point. > > > This I find on the web: > > To describe the condition of something going through a process, use > "status". > > To describe the condition of something, use "state" > > > > > > Hereby I want to propose to rename State into Status in cases it is not > related to the State of a Country. > > > I find that status gives the feeling that it could change when state > looks more static. > > But I'm not a native speaker and it will be good to have feedback from > native speakers. > I was going through old topics and found this proposal. I am from Australia. In my opinion STATUS is more appropriate in this instance. This avoids confusion with the province type (e.g. Australia is made up of six STATES and two territories). To use STATE in this way is technically correct but non-technical users of an ERP would expect this to be STATUS and would have less chance of becoming confused.
Jim Gaylard > -- > > -- [email protected] mailing list
