db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Laura Stewart" <scotsmat...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-1376) File java/engine/org/apache/derby/loc/messages_en.properties - Message XSLAT.D
Date Wed, 07 Jun 2006 16:45:27 GMT
*** (LS) Please see my comments below.

On 6/6/06, Suresh Thalamati <suresh.thalamati@gmail.com> wrote:
> David Van Couvering (JIRA) wrote:
> >     [
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1376?page=comments#action_12415060]
> >
> > David Van Couvering commented on DERBY-1376:
> > --------------------------------------------
> >
> > I like Halley's recommendation, but I would suggest that providing the
> format Halley suggests may be difficult given our current message framework
> (that is, provide a message with multiple lines).  It might be sufficient to
> say
> >

*** (LS) What is the limitation for messages in Derby?

I also like the Halley's recommendation. Another approach to help the
> users understand errors better might be to document the errors and
> explain in more deatail what would be possible causes/solutions for a
> particular error.
> > Log directory {0} exists.   The directory may belong to another
> database.  Please make sure the specified logDevice location is correct.
> >
> I like this one, it is more clear.

*** (LS) I would prefer this:
"The log directory {0} exists.   The directory might belong to another
database.  Ensure that the location specified for the logDevice property is

> (I do like to say "please", it doesn't hurt to be polite to our users).
> >
> > Also, it would be helpful to say *where* you specify logDevice (e.g.
> "please make sure the derby.foo.logDevice property is set to the correct
> location.")

*** (LS) While I like to be polite too, we are not sitting down to tea with
the users :-) It is more professional in technical documentation to leave
the "Please" out. Besides, the key is not to be polite, but to provide
the information that users need to resolve the problem.

> I think additional explanation is not  really required. User will see
> this error only when the s/he uses the logDevice attribute on the URL.
> Thanks
> -suresh

Laura Stewart

View raw message