cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Hartle <mhar...@hartle-klug.com>
Subject Re: [Woody] - <wd:hotkey> status?
Date Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:19:32 GMT
Hi Sylvain,

> I don't agree here: vi is not i18nized and gives no visual feedback on 
> what its commands are. The purpose of access keys is to provide fast 
> access to fields that are _displayed_ in the page. And as the label of 
> these fields varies with the language, so should vary the access keys. 
> The fact that the access key must be present in the label text also 
> enforces this.

hmm... the question is, does it always make sense to forcefully vary the 
access keys along with the field names when another language is used ? I 
agree, when using the concept of underlining the access key of fields, 
this requires the character to be present in the label, but perhaps 
other concepts might be more feasable in the long term, as this 
requirement might backlash in some cases; I cannot provide a good 
example right now, but what about localizations where many labels have 
very similar characters ?

> And "habitualization" is related to what you usually need. Switch to 
> another language version of the office applications you usually use, 
> and you'll see that menu shortcuts will change also. An example that 
> comes to mind is MS Word, where "bold" is ctrl-B in english but ctrl-G 
> in french because the french for bold is "gras".

As a consequence, explaining to someone how to make text bold in MS Word 
has to take into account the used localization of the application 
although the semantics of the task stay the same. The same applies when 
eg. you are working abroad, having to adapt to the new localization of 
commands for exactly the same tasks you previously used without having 
to think about explicitly.

> Sylvain

Best regards,

Michael Hartle,
Hartle & Klug Consulting GmbH


Mime
View raw message