Admin → Maintenance → Mail → Settings → "Maximum emails to send per minute (Set to 0 to disable.)"
It's unclear whether "disabling" means:
- disabling mail sending altogether, by allowing a maximum of 0 mails per minute (which is what I understood it to mean)
- disabling the limit, allowing any number of mails (which, based on a quick test, seems to be what is actually meant)
disable the maximum -- so, do not throttle.
Thanks for confirming, I'll try to prepare a PR for "(Set to 0 for no limit)".
I don't really it see it as unclear, the setting is "maximum emails", so a limit, and disabling a limit means no limits. But I guess, if you misunderstood then it is possible others can as well. So a small clarification may be good.
Yeah I was probably a bit biased because I was looking for an option to disable all or all non-essential mail, but apparently there is none. Still, I think it's better to be precise, that also makes the job easier for the translators. :-*
It also means more work I suspect as that string is reused in lots of contexts.
Yeah, but not every string it is (redundantly, not code-included-ly) used in is as unclear as this one. ;) O:)
Quote from: Arantor on September 07, 2019, 06:48:20 AM
It also means more work I suspect as that string is reused in lots of contexts.
if it indeed is, I don't see a reason for it. The actual setting is unique, so the parenthesis can be included in it's string.
Oh I see, in this case there are two strings, $txt['mail_limit'] and $txt['zero_to_disable']... :-[
Oh, combinations like that make translating more difficult than having it all in one. No space for confusion. So, I wonder why it is like that.
Quote from: Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen on September 07, 2019, 10:00:04 AM
Oh, combinations like that make translating more difficult than having it all in one. No space for confusion. So, I wonder why it is like that.
Because in English the second half is used everywhere, and thus the string gets reused.
the PR is unneeded...
The phrase "0 to disable" (meaning "setting 0 means max out, no limit" is standard across pretty much every peice of software I have ever worked on or used....
Your belief that it should mean "disable the feature" is not standard usage or belief.....
Since this seems to be controversial, I won't write a PR. (Marking the topic as fixed.)
If anybody wants this changed similarly to how I suggested, please comment.
I do think, purely from an i18n point of view that with settings like this it would make more sense to have this
$txt['mail_limit'] = "Maximum emails to send per minute (0 for no limit)"
Than combine two like this
$txt['mail_limit'] = "Maximum emails to send per minute"
$txt['zero_to_disable'] = "(Set to 0 to disable.)"
Especially, since the translators often do not see these two at the same time ... also, because the actual structure of the sentence may vary according to language, so we shouldn't force structure.
EDIT:
I understand, this is actually not exactly the same issue as posted in the op, but very much related, as this allows for more specific descriptions per use case as well.
Hang on, are you suggesting that not every language follows the same case, gender, tense and other formats as English?
Be quiet! You'll confuse the Americans. :P
Confucious say, America not the center of universe.
Yup, though this does create more work for translators. It's also separated so that the super generic "0 to disable" string can be shown in smaller text underneath the main string, something that I personally would prefer didn't go into the language strings, they have enough HTML in them already.
Quote from: Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen on September 09, 2019, 11:47:02 PM
I do think, purely from an i18n point of view that with settings like this it would make more sense to have this
$txt['mail_limit'] = "Maximum emails to send per minute (0 for no limit)"
Than combine two [...]
When translating such string, I tend to "improve" the strings in my language independently of whether the english string is changed according to my suggestions, to (attempt to) remove the problem (in this case, I'd maybe go with something like "Limit maximum number of emails to send per minute (Set to 0 to disable.)").
Quote from: Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen on September 09, 2019, 11:47:02 PM
Especially, since the translators often do not see these two at the same time ...
In the case of two strings you at least
know which string is included, I find string duplication (https://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=567249.0) to be a much bigger problem, because you have to keep the redundant copies synchronized (also as a translator, which means you need to keep a glossary), and sometimes don't even know which obscure other variable might be referenced or verbatim-quoted (and the original might have changed in the meantime). But yeah, variables are a problem, especially for non-technical translators (also discussed here, more recently (https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/issues/5661#issuecomment-526724915).
And yeah, every lookup of another variable (or search for a variable which name you don't know) takes additional time off of translation. :-\
Quote from: Antechinus on September 10, 2019, 01:08:55 AM
Hang on, are you suggesting that not every language follows the same case, gender, tense and other formats as English?
Be quiet! You'll confuse the Americans. :P
I only have a very basic knowledge of this, but I guess in such languages you'd be forced to re-write/re-translate the variable content into the first string anyway, no? (But it would probably not mean as much duplication of strings, only multiple "similar" strings adjusted to the context they're used in?)
I only have limited knowledge of it myself, but I do know that Finnish has vastly more complex use of such things than English. Same applies to the closely-related Estonian, and no doubt to a range of other languages. Beats me why. They must have got bored sitting around in the Arctic winter and decided to have some fun. :D
I also remember Emanuele, who is Italian, grumbling about the English-centric formatting of text strings in 2.0.x and how it borked things in other languages. He pushed some changes in 2.1 alpha because of this.
Quote(But it would probably not mean as much duplication of strings, only multiple "similar" strings adjusted to the context they're used in?)
That's my understanding of it (not being able to read any of the relevant languages in any depth).
In many languages context is key, for example if some one asked me to translate "Set to 0 to disable" in to any other language I know, I would first ask in which context would this be used? Disable is not a word that is easily translated.
So, in english; super generic.
In other languages, eh - not so much.
And that is a problem systemic to the language files :(
Indeed, it is.
Came across a similar issue in my IRL job...
"If you identified a custom directory structure for certificates during the previous step of the installation, Certificates should be in the directory..."
In English this makes sense....
however, it makes multiple senses....
The Japanese interpreted that to mean "The installer will add certificates in the custom defined directory. If the certificates are not added, there is an issue."
What it actually means "For a custom directory structure, certificates must be placed in the target directory before the installer is run."
When I read some of the previous german translations of some SMF strings, it was quite obvious that the previous translator(s) didn't understand what the string meant, or how the described feature works in SMF. And some strings were veeery loosely translated. ::)
yeah, but loosely translated can work in german... it's still comprehensible. :P
All too often this becomes "I don't care what language it is, I don't speak it, not my problem and any old rubbish is fine because it's not my problem" :(
I totally agree: If you don't speak the language, why bother? Focus on improving the english "translation" or other stuff.
You can try to fix everything, but usually you can't fix it all yourself. Leave some of the "fun" for others. ;)
Developers should care on some level though because with a bit of care, they can make it less hard to translate sensibly.
Quote from: Arantor on September 11, 2019, 01:12:09 PM
Developers should care on some level though because with a bit of care, they can make it less hard to translate sensibly.
Exactly, that is basically what i18n means. Planning and coding with international markets in mind.
Quote from: Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen on September 10, 2019, 11:31:47 PM
In many languages context is key, for example if some one asked me to translate "Set to 0 to disable" in to any other language I know, I would first ask in which context would this be used? Disable is not a word that is easily translated.
So, in english; super generic.
In other languages, eh - not so much.
Yep. It's why I didn't finish the portuguese one yet, I was checking every string (besides large phrases) in context. 2.1 made this even harder with the language strings that aren't used directly, so you can find where they are. English is considered so easy to learn because it is much simpler than a lot of other languages. And after a poor translation was already made, good luck checking eevery single string to see if it was correct.
In this particular case disable is very straightforward and there's no other alternative translation for portuguese, but it'd be nice if there were two strings, one for each situation. I was confused about this some times as well, while using the forum in english. It is just as confusing in either language.
Quote from: Gwenwyfar on September 11, 2019, 05:11:25 PMIt is just as confusing in either language.
This has to be the definition of i18n success. :D
Quote from: Gwenwyfar on September 11, 2019, 05:11:25 PM
In this particular case disable is very straightforward and there's no other alternative translation for portuguese, but it'd be nice if there were two strings, one for each situation. I was confused about this some times as well, while using the forum in english. It is just as confusing in either language.
In all honesty, I can also translate that one quite easily so that it is understandable, but then it's not necessarily good language - in Finnish, there isn't really a one word translation for disable
The go to translation I would use without context is "poistaa käytöstä" = "remove from use/turn off", and this can easily turn in to the problem described in the OP - what are we turning off here? The emails, or the limit? Specially if I have to make similar compromises with the other string. Just using this as an example, of a problem that is not really unique with translations.
I'm not sure this ever resolved to a specific change. Should we close it out?
This is a difficult discussion, since the broader question raised throughout is what needs to be done to 2.1 to bring it more compliant with i18n. Which is a valid question. But I'm not sure we have an actionable answer yet...
I stand by my original point, but I guess once you know what is meant, it's obvious. ;)
Quote from: m4z on November 06, 2019, 04:51:03 PM
I stand by my original point, but I guess once you know what is meant, it's obvious. ;)
By the time you know what you're doing, you're done!
I'll close this one out.
Quote from: shawnb61 on November 06, 2019, 04:41:47 PM
This is a difficult discussion, since the broader question raised throughout is what needs to be done to 2.1 to bring it more compliant with i18n. Which is a valid question. But I'm not sure we have an actionable answer yet...
Agreed, this topic is food for thought and something to consider in a broader sense - but not an exact identifiable bug to be easily fixed.