Bug 143287 - Spelling - Correct and Correct All is inappropriate.
Summary: Spelling - Correct and Correct All is inappropriate.
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: LibreOffice
Classification: Unclassified
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version:
(earliest affected)
unspecified
Hardware: All All
: medium normal
Assignee: Not Assigned
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: needsUXEval
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2021-07-09 23:29 UTC by keepitsimplestupid
Modified: 2021-07-13 14:57 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:
Crash report or crash signature:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description keepitsimplestupid 2021-07-09 23:29:58 UTC
The old actions of "Change" and "Change all" from Ubuntu 12 ERA is more appropriate than Correct and Correct All from the Ubuntu 18 ERA.

Correct has the same confusion as right.  e.g.Turn right here.  Right, That's were "correct" is appropriate.

Correct has Two meanings.

One is "Don;t do anything".  it;s the right way.  or Make a correction.

"Change" and "Change all" is not ambiguous.


"Correct" and "Correct All" is.
Comment 1 Heiko Tietze 2021-07-12 11:49:20 UTC
Changed eight years ago with this patch https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/1541/. Samuel, Miklos: please comment since the patch back then has no ticket as reference.
Comment 2 Miklos Vajna 2021-07-12 12:16:21 UTC
And to make it worse, the gerrit upgrade erased the comment I posted to that review, so I don't know what was the argument back then, to evaluate if that still holds today or not. :-/

Given that, I don't mind either way.
Comment 3 Samuel Mehrbrodt (allotropia) 2021-07-13 05:47:53 UTC
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #1)
> Changed eight years ago with this patch
> https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/1541/. Samuel, Miklos: please
> comment since the patch back then has no ticket as reference.

Please consult with native English speakers which is the better wording.
What is written in comment 0 seems to make sense, but I am not the one to judge :)
Comment 4 Telesto 2021-07-13 11:27:29 UTC
There not a dedicated group of native English speakers to consult for button labeling, I think :-(. What would approach it, would be the translation team. Where topic mostly about translatability. Which also an topic of concern in this matter.

Possibly documentation/help having an opinion too? 

Always struggling with the contacts in those area's. Adding - rather arbitrary - Jean-Baptiste Faure to CC (primarily regarding translation aspect)
Comment 5 V Stuart Foote 2021-07-13 12:53:23 UTC
We lable for clarity of the action. As a button action 'Correct' is a simple verb acting on an object, or a transitive verb. We are correcting an error.

In adjectival form it would be oposite of the button action, meaning to ignore an error. The is no ambiguity as the spell check is for making corrections.

Also here--correct as opposed to change--is the precise action the button will apply.

I would not alter it.
Comment 6 Telesto 2021-07-13 13:34:30 UTC
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #5)
> We lable for clarity of the action. As a button action 'Correct' is a simple
> verb acting on an object, or a transitive verb. We are correcting an error.
> 
> In adjectival form it would be oposite of the button action, meaning to
> ignore an error. The is no ambiguity as the spell check is for making
> corrections.
> 
> Also here--correct as opposed to change--is the precise action the button
> will apply.
> 
> I would not alter it.

Looking a the competition, it might be 'change all'.  
I'm personally more inclined to the view of the OP, reading it as more natural.

Correct can 'correct' something without being 'correct' in the context given. What you do is change this for that based on the suggestion. 

However I'm not native English speaker and surely no authority on the matter
Comment 7 V Stuart Foote 2021-07-13 13:42:34 UTC
A fair bit of "Bike shedding" here. Will close this out as WF.

Labeling is correct, with no improvement in clarity should it be altered as the spell check is fundamentally for making corrections.

Oh, and I am a native speaker of Englins (en-US), but frankly many of the collaborators here have equally strong grasp of English grammar. -- Stuart
Comment 8 Telesto 2021-07-13 14:45:47 UTC
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #7)
> A fair bit of "Bike shedding" here. Will close this out as WF.
> 
> Labeling is correct, with no improvement in clarity should it be altered as
> the spell check is fundamentally for making corrections.
> 
> Oh, and I am a native speaker of Englins (en-US), but frankly many of the
> collaborators here have equally strong grasp of English grammar. -- Stuart

I'm always bit troubled with the bike-shedding part. The point can be valid but at the same time is easy argument to be used as "knockdown argument". 

The problem started because it god silently changed - without a ticket - without (actual) consultation. And the few notes there where got lost.. 
[And silent changes is pretty good way of avoiding discussion] 

Also being a bike-shedding topic is relative to the expertise ;-). If someone studied "Linguistics" this being more important to them.

I have to admit. A change causes lots of issues at Translation/Documentation. And not many users have complained..
Comment 9 V Stuart Foote 2021-07-13 14:57:36 UTC
(In reply to Telesto from comment #8)
> 
> The problem started because it god silently changed - without a ticket -
> without (actual) consultation. And the few notes there where got lost.. 
> [And silent changes is pretty good way of avoiding discussion] 
> 

That was in Jan 2013! Not like it is anything new or recent.  

Changing the lable now does nothing valid and does cause churn in the l10n efforts. Taking about it endlessly is the definition of "bike shedding", other substantive issues to move on to.