Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore Started by Steeley · · Read 20049 times 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. previous topic - next topic

Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

This arose out of a discussion with Ruth while she was translating English files into German .. and pertains to Board permissions for groups...

For each member group, a board [Admin>Boards>Modify Boards] has three access options: "allow", "X", and "deny". For boards, "X" has the text "=Ignore" (In groups permissions, X= "disallow")

group.jpg

Regardless of whether the text says X ="ignore", or "disallow" the "explanation text" says:

Remember that if you deny a permission, any member - whether moderator or otherwise - that is in that group will be denied that as well.
For this reason, you should use deny carefully, only when necessary. Ignore/Disallow, on the other hand, denies unless otherwise granted.

This "unless otherwise granted" implies that something else set somewhere else can effectively grant permission for a group to that particular board if [X} is selected (in other words, it's not controlled at the modify board page [Admin>Boards>Modify Boards], but by permissions elsewhere.)
 
If setting the permission elsewhere to "allow" is in fact, true/possible (still/anymore/ever?), can someone explain where/how? I'm intrigued.

If it isn't true (and if it isn't required for legacy or perhaps future support), perhaps it should be removed as it is confusing, because the default for X being "deny" unless otherwise granted (and "otherwise granted" not being possible), it's redundant to "deny" as an explicit setting.
 
Last Edit: April 07, 2023, 01:17:00 am by Steeley
// Deep inside every dilemma lies a solution that involves explosives //

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #1 –

Hi, Steeley! :wink:

A, X and D are working perfect everywhere. It is working for access in the boards and it is working for the group permissions about functions. A, X and D are "advanced settings", they need to be enabled, if an admin wants to use them.

The "normal settings" show just a single column of checkboxes. If you check one of them, the access (or the permission) will be allowed. If you dont check it, then it will be not allowed. If you enable the "advanced settings", which are adding the possibillity to "deny" something, then you will see this 3 columns A, X and D. Checking this X in the middle (in the advanced settings) is almost the same like an unchecked checkbox (in the normal settings).

If you have chosen a very simple system about member groups, group permissions and board permission profiles, you wont need those "advanced settings", you can leave them not enabled. But if you have created a more difficult system, with a lot of very different groups and permissions, the advanced settings can help you.

There might be always some "conflicts", when you are setting permissions. One group shall be able to do or to see something, another group should not be able. Problems start, if you have members, which belong to more than one group. Then you need to check, if your system about the settings for access/permissions is really working for all of your members, they way it is intended.

In the "normal settings" most times it will be enough, to check a checkbox for one member group and to leave it unchecked for another. Group 1 is able, group 2 is not able. If a member belongs to group 1 and to group 2, he will be able.

In the "advanced settings" A and X will do the same:  Group 1 has an A, group 2 has a X. Group 1 is able, group 2 is not able. If a member belongs to group 1 and to group 2, he will be able.

This is the meaning of "Disallow, on the other hand, denies unless otherwise granted": The X (for disallow) is only working, if there is no A (for allow) in another group the same member belongs to. The reason for this behavior is the fact, that in the system permissions always are added.

If you dont like it at all, that a member of group 2 will be able to do or to see something, because he is also in group 1, then you could use the D in the advanced settings for group 2. The D will deny this permission or the access for each person that belongs to group 2 and it will overwrite the A this person has got from group 1.

The D is very "mighty", "powerful" and "dangerous", it will always overwrite an A, which comes from another group, if a member is in both groups. D needs to be checked and controlled very well and you mostly wont need to deny something. There are better solutions.


Edit:

I just translated and tried to understand your post here, Steeley: https://www.elkarte.net/community/index.php?topic=6225.msg44948#msg44948

It seems to me, that you are just confused about this pretty old english language string, which is telling about permissions and ignore in the boards, if the advanced settings are enabled for the boards. In this language string (I think, it had been already there in SMF) some wrong words are used. It is nonsense, what this string is telling: It is not possible for an admin to set member permissions or group access on "ignore". In a board it is only possible to select various "permission profiles", which will work in this board and to give access to a board. With the advanced settings the access can also become "forbidden", denied.

Allowing members "to ignore boards" is another, generell function/feature and it is not given in a certain board by the admin. If this ignore-function is enabled, then members are able to select in their profiles which contents of certain boards they want to ignore. But they still will see all the boards, they are allowed to access.

In my eyes this string on line 90 in ManageBoards.english.php for board access has to be edited.
It is wrong and it is leading to confusion:
Code: [Select]
$txt['boardsaccess_option_desc'] = 'For each permission you can choose \'Allow\' (A), \'Ignore\' (X), or <span class="alert">\'Deny\' (D)</span>.<br /><br />If you deny access, any member - (including moderators) - in that group will be denied access.<br />For this reason, you should set deny carefully, only when <strong>necessary</strong>. Ignore, on the other hand, denies unless otherwise granted.';

It should be this way:
Code: [Select]
$txt['boardsaccess_option_desc'] = 'For each group you can choose \'Allow\' (A), \'Disallow\' (X), or <span class="alert">\'Deny\' (D)</span>.<br /><br />If you deny access, any member - (including moderators) - in that group will be denied access.<br />For this reason, you should set deny carefully, only when <strong>necessary</strong>. Disallow, on the other hand, denies unless otherwise granted.';

Just for comparing, this is the string for the advanced settings about permissions on line 74 in ManagePermissions.english.php:
Code: [Select]
$txt['permissions_option_desc'] = 'For each permission you can pick either \'Allow\' (A), \'Disallow\' (X), or <span class="alert">\'Deny\' (D)</span>.<br /><br />Remember that if you deny a permission, any member - whether moderator or otherwise - that is in that group will be denied that as well.<br />For this reason, you should use deny carefully, only when <strong>necessary</strong>. Disallow, on the other hand, denies unless otherwise granted.';

Someone mixed this up once (by copy and paste?) and made an additional mess with including the word "ignore" in the language string on line 90 in ManageBoards.english.php. I think, this mistake has maybe never been noticed, because almost noone is using the advanced settings for board access.
Last Edit: April 07, 2023, 05:42:55 am by Ruth
 

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #2 –

Quote from: Steeley – This "unless otherwise granted" implies that something else set somewhere else can effectively grant permission for a group to that particular board if [X} is selected (in other words, it's not controlled at the modify board page [Admin>Boards>Modify Boards], but by permissions elsewhere.)

Usually, if one group is set to X, it's blocked from them. However, if it's allowed in another group they are in, then they will be allowed.
Let's say you have 2 groups:
Group 1 is allowed everything, but Group 2 is blocked from the Recycle Bin.
If a member is in both groups, they will have access to the Recycle Bin.

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #3 –

Quote from: Burke Knight –
Quote from: Steeley – This "unless otherwise granted" implies that something else set somewhere else can effectively grant permission for a group to that particular board if [X} is selected (in other words, it's not controlled at the modify board page [Admin>Boards>Modify Boards], but by permissions elsewhere.)

Usually, if one group is set to X, it's blocked from them. However, if it's allowed in another group they are in, then they will be allowed.
Let's say you have 2 groups:
Group 1 is allowed everything, but Group 2 is blocked from the Recycle Bin.
If a member is in both groups, they will have access to the Recycle Bin.

Yes that's how it appears to work. For example:

Assume a member is in both groups A and B and access to Board #1 is set..  

Group A --- A  [X]  D
Group B --- [A]  X  D

That member would get access to Board #1 by virtue of Group B membership, while Group A members would not.

But then this setting..

Group A --- A  X  [D]
Group B --- [A]  X  D

..does exactly the same thing?

That is because X defaults to [D]eny "unless otherwise granted". I'm led to believe there is nowhere else it is otherwise granted?

So, the question is, is there any possible way access to Board #1 can be "otherwise granted" for Group A if the access setting is [X] for Group A?

If not, there is no difference between [X] and [D], is there?

If there is a way for Board#1 access to be "otherwise granted" to Group A with that group set to [X] in Board #1 settings, I can see how that could be very handy. Current setting descriptions imply it is possible. Is it now? If not, was it once, or provisional for the future?

If not possible past, present or future, at least for board access settings, then the description should explicitly exclude the option for board access, (and be removed as an option?)
Last Edit: April 07, 2023, 03:28:29 pm by Steeley
// Deep inside every dilemma lies a solution that involves explosives //

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #4 –

Quote from: Ruth – Hi, Steeley! :wink:

[snip}

This is the meaning of "Disallow, on the other hand, denies unless otherwise granted": The X (for disallow) is only working, if there is no A (for allow) in another group the same member belongs to. The reason for this behavior is the fact, that in the system permissions always are added.

If you dont like it at all, that a member of group 2 will be able to do or to see something, because he is also in group 1, then you could use the D in the advanced settings for group 2. The D will deny this permission or the access for each person that belongs to group 2 and it will overwrite the A this person has got from group 1.

The D is very "mighty", "powerful" and "dangerous", it will always overwrite an A, which comes from another group, if a member is in both groups. D needs to be checked and controlled very well and you mostly wont need to deny something. There are better solutions.

[snip}


Hi Ruth, :wink back at ya:

So, are you saying that a member of both groups A and B and access to Board #1 is set.. 

Group A --- A  [X]  D
Group B --- [A]  X  D

..that member would get access to Board #1 by virtue of Group B membership, while Group A members would not.

But this setting..

Group A --- A  X  [D]
Group B --- [A]  X  D

..denies that member access because the member is also in group A and group A is denied,, even if the member is also in group B which is  "allowed"?

 
Last Edit: April 07, 2023, 02:13:45 pm by Steeley
// Deep inside every dilemma lies a solution that involves explosives //

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #5 –

If deny is still letting members see boards their other groups can see, it appears that there's a bug.
If set to deny, then no matter what other groups the member is in, they should not be able to access.
I wonder if it could be due to the order of the groups in the member's profile.

For example, a Global Moderator has access, but not "Support" group.
Then if member has GMod as first, he'd have access. But if Support was main group, then he'd not.

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #6 –

Quote from: Burke Knight – If deny is still letting members see boards their other groups can see, it appears that there's a bug.
If set to deny, then no matter what other groups the member is in, they should not be able to access.
I wonder if it could be due to the order of the groups in the member's profile.

For example, a Global Moderator has access, but not "Support" group.
Then if member has GMod as first, he'd have access. But if Support was main group, then he'd not.

Interesting point if indeed that's what is happening (I don't know, I'll have to test it.. ) 

(In the words of Johann Sebastian Schwarzenegger: "I'll be Bach..")


Edit: OK, I'm "Bach".. 

Actually @Burke Knight, there doesn't appear to be a hierarchical case where it doesn't work...

This is how it works in my forum ..

Group A --- A  [X]  D
Group B --- [A]  X  D

..a member of both Group A and B would get access to Board #1 by virtue of Group B membership, while Group A members not members of Group B as well would not.

But this setting..

Group A --- A  X  [D]
Group B --- [A]  X  D

..denies that member access because the member is also in group A and group A is denied,, even if the member is also in group B which is  "allowed".

The meaning of [X] is to "DEFER" to the group access setting of any other group that is set to ALLOW, for any member of the Group with an [X] that is also a member of the allowed group.

Otherwise, setting a group to [D]eny, denies access to the board for any member of that group regardless of any other group allowed access to the board.

In other words [X] does not ignore or disallow anything, [X] defers to other permission settings for that board for members of groups that are in groups that are allowed access in that boards settings. [X] only denies access to a group member if the member is not also in an allowed group. (whew!)

I suggest for clarity that the words "Ignore" and/or "disallow" or "not allowed" (whatever) be changed to "defer" or deferred", as that better describes  in English what selecting [X] actually does .
Last Edit: April 07, 2023, 02:15:28 pm by Steeley
// Deep inside every dilemma lies a solution that involves explosives //

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #8 –

Quote from: Steeley –
So, are you saying that a member of both groups A and B and access to Board #1 is set.. 

Group A --- A  [X]  D
Group B --- [A]  X  D

..that member would get access to Board #1 by virtue of Group B membership, while Group A members would not.

But this setting..

Group A --- A  X  [D]
Group B --- [A]  X  D

..denies that member access because the member is also in group A and group A is denied,, even if the member is also in group B which is  "allowed"?


Yes. :)

If a member is in two groups, one is on A, the other one is on X - he will have access.
If a member is in two groups, one is on A, the other one is on D - he wont have access.

A is "stronger" than X. It will overwrite a X in another group. Permissions are added.
D is the "strongest". It will always overwrite A, no matter for which sort of member group it is set.

Thats why you need to be very careful with D.
Never use it on groups, which are based on the number of posts.
This D would "kill" also the permissions of moderators.

Everyone on forum belongs also to the post based member groups,
at least we are all "Newbies", no matter to which other member groups we belong.

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #9 –

Quote from: Ruth –
Yes. :)

If a member is in two groups, one is on A, the other one is on X - he will have access.
If a member is in two groups, one is on A, the other one is on D - he wont have access.

A is "stronger" than X. It will overwrite a X in another group. Permissions are added.
D is the "strongest". It will always overwrite A, no matter for which sort of member group it is set.

Thats why you need to be very careful with D.
Never use it on groups, which are based on the number of posts.
This D would "kill" also the permissions of moderators.

Everyone on forum belongs also to the post based member groups,
at least we are all "Newbies", no matter to which other member groups we belong.

OK - Got it. I knew by the description for the use of [X] that the logic supposedly deferred (i.e. "unless otherwise allowed") to some other setting somewhere. I just didn't know where that was meant to be, if indeed the description for [X]: "Ignore, on the other hand, denies unless otherwise granted]" was "nonsense" (and therefore [X] = [D], period, end of discussion).

But no, the logic itself wasn't nonsense, I believe now what you were telling me was the description of the logic was nonsense because the literal meaning of the associated English word "ignore" (and  the English word "disallow" too) is nonsense. There I think we both agree. The only remaining question then is how to 'fix it'.

 

Yes the word "ignore" used to describe  [X] ("= ignore") is confusing and for sure [X] "=disallowed" (nicht gestatten?) makes no sense (actually contradictory in English), if indeed [X] means deferred to some other permission setting (in this case other member groups being allowed access to the board). And it appears to be even more confusing in German. I haven't found a direct translation from the English word "defer" into German (I've seen some "temporal"  references "decide later" or "postpone"), but defer in English has no temporal dependency, it often means "someTHING else decides or rules" not someTIME else it is, was, or will be decided.

Another, perhaps even better English word, could be "yield"

yield.jpg

(meaning give authority to something else, such as the train approaching on the railroad tracks you are about to drive across) but again, I am not talking about "production" as in bushels of corn per acre or 'profits' (German word given for "yield" = ertrag). :sob:

If there's an appropriate word or expression in German that means the same thing as "yield" in English as I am using it, well, I defer and/or yield to your much greater knowledge there too"

I am pretty certain translation was contributing to our confusion @ruth, (I've described elsewhere my amusement of watching a Thai engineer and Armenian technician trying to communicate in English - a language foreign to both of them), but in any event, now that the basic question has been answered as to the "meaning of [X] "and we were actually in contentious agreement on behavior, translation discussions should go back to the Localization board. :rofl:

:sparkles::tada::confetti_ball:
Last Edit: April 07, 2023, 03:47:07 pm by Steeley
// Deep inside every dilemma lies a solution that involves explosives //

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #10 –

Quote....and for sure [X] "=disallowed" (nicht gestatten?) makes no sense (actually contradictory in English), if indeed [X] means deferred to some other permission setting (in this case other member groups being allowed access to the board).

Hi, Steeley!

I am not sure, if I understood you well, sorry. It is also really hard for me to explain. My english is very poor. 
But it seems to me, that you still have not really understood, that permissions are added in the system?
Maybe this is, why you think, that the word "disallow" is nonsense or not logic for the "X". But it is. It is logic.

X = Disallow is doing exactly the same like an unchecked checkbox.
(if you use the simple way of settings, with only one column of checkboxes)
X or an empty checkbox does not give access to a board (or it does not allow to use a feature).
A = Allow is doing the same like a checked checkbox.
A or a checked checkbox gives access to a board (or it does allow to use a feature).

If a member is only in one group and has a X (or his checkbox is not checked), he will have no access to a board or is not allowed to use a feature. X will work and means "disallowed", forbidden, not allowed.

But if a member has a X and an A for the same permission/access (or an uncecked and a checked checkbox) because he is in two groups, he will allways be allowed/have access, because permissions are added for a member.

So X does not allow, but only until there is no A as well for the same permission.
An unchecked checkbox does not allow, but only until there is no checked checkbox as well for the same permission.

If you tell the system a "no" (X) and a "yes" (A) for the same permission, systems needs to know, what to do now.
System has decided once, that an A is always stronger than a X. "Yes" is more important than "no".

A has more power than X.
A is added to the permissions of a member and will overwrite the X.
But big bad D is the strongest of all and will overwrite any A.

So X is a "soft way" for not allowing something, until it will be allowed.

:wink:  X is like a soft Mum, saying "no" to her child. But sweet Auntie will bring an A, which means "yes".  Mum will close her eyes then and the child will be allowed. But then comes big, bad Dad with the D and says "NO-NO". And this will mean "no" for the child then.

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #11 –

I understand exactly how it works now Ruth..  As the guidance text on the permission explains, if you use X, permission may be controlled elsewhere.

And I will allow that the descriptive word  given to X  in German, may translate into the word "Ignore" or "Disallow" in English. but, those words in English are NOT CORRECT for describing what selecting X does.

Quote from: Ruth –
I am not sure, if I understood you well, sorry. It is also really hard for me to explain. My english is very poor. 


Then accept what someone who speaks English pretty well says would be a better English word!
 
In fact, I would accept "X = cumquat" or even "X = :rooster:" because then it would be a label, not a description, and the guidance text adequately explains what "cumquat" or :rooster: does, without having a meaning that conflicts with the guidance!.

Here's a way to look at it that may help explain my point.

If you select Allow, you are allowing members of the group that permission
If you select Deny, you are denying members of the group that permission.

But if you select X, you neither allow, nor deny, members of that group that permission if members of that group are in a group that has that permission assigned somewhere else. (For clarification and assurance, I wanted to know "where that somewhere else was, if indeed it existed", which it does.)

Neither explicitly allow, nor explicitly deny.   X does not mean "ignore" (actually, it could if you consider X means "ignore this setting here, and look elsewhere for controlling permissions for (some) members of the group") and X absolutely does not mean "disallow", which as I explained a few days ago,..

From the Merriam Webster English Dictionary

Disallow:  transitive verb

1: to deny the force, truth, or validity of
2: to refuse to allow

Deny: transitive verb

(Skip definition alternatives 1 and 2..)

3-
a: to give a negative answer to
b: to refuse to grant {or allow}

"Refuse to grant" and "refuse to allow" mean literally the same thing,. "Disallow" = "Deny."

But If I don't explicitly grant or allow (I do not select A), but I also don't explicitly deny (I do not select D), then I YIELD or DEFER to something else (I select X!).

I suspect whomever originally chose "Ignore" or "disallow" for  X did not speak English as their primary language, and thusly confused the hell out of me as a novice admin setting up EA for the first time. I finally took X to heart, ignored whatever the help was saying and just tried different options until I got it to work the way I desired. I let the logic behavior define the settings in my mind, not the "help text".  It's very poor practice to provide "help" that just misleads or confuses things (that's the government's job! :unamused:)
 
My own efforts to find the proper word in German for an English word that means what I understand X  to mean in English fails miserably, and so I'm not about to tell someone who speaks German what German words should be used.

Again, this part of the discussion belongs in the Localization board.

And last, as I have noted repeatedly, English is a miserable language to use to accurately convey exact meaning - and the more words you assemble to try to provide context for meaning often creates even more confusion. [It has been said often that Great Britain and the USA are two countries separated by a common language], and that is why someone had the wisdom to come up with symbols and emojis that mean the same thing in most all languages.. and so please don't get me wrong, I'm not :angry:, I'm :smile:, even :heart_eyes:.



Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 01:32:55 pm by Steeley
// Deep inside every dilemma lies a solution that involves explosives //

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #12 –

Steeley, almost one week ago, I wrote a note in the other topic, that the english language string on line 90 in ManageBoards.english.php is irritating and should be edited, because of the wrong words "permissions" and "ignore" in there. The german string on line 90 had been always correct, at least on my forums, because we corrected this nonsense years ago.

So please stop talking about any possible "X = ignore (ignorieren)" in this german string. "Ignore" has never been used there in this context, because it is nonsense. It has been always "X = disallow (nicht erlauben)" in the german string. I am fine with X = disallow (nicht erlaubt) and I always was. I don't need any other, better german word there, to understand how X works. Noone needs to discuss this with me or should suggest me a better german word. I also did not ask for that in this case.

QuoteThen accept what someone who speaks English pretty well says would be a better English word!

Thats rude as a response to me, after I told you again, that it is very hard for me to explain things in a foreign language, I don't speak well. And after me trying to explain things to you for almost one week now. I also don't think, that I did not accept any better english word for "disallow"?

The english word "disallow" is used with X in the permissions. To me it is logic, how X is working and I also have no problem with the word "disallow" for X.  If you don't accept this english word there, because you think it is not logic, or if you don't like this word for board access, then fine. Not my buisness. Discuss this with other english/american people, me beeing german is not the right person for this.

What I tried, was explaining to you, how the permission system and the board access is working, because it seemed to me, that you did not understand it completly, when you started this discussion with me.

QuoteIt's very poor practice to provide "help" that just misleads or confuses things (that's the government's job!:unamused:)

This is not the only string in the language files, which is incorrect or could be misunderstood. Where humans work, mistakes will happen, thats just natural. :smiley: ElkArte is free ware, people spend their time to devellopp this great software, to help and to support us and to explain the features to us. They earn nothing for all their work and efford. So I think, we should accept, that not everything is perfect....most things are.

I don't know, if you ever have tried to translate - sometimes very difficult - texts about technical stuff in a foreign language, you dont speak too well, into your own language? It is hard work, what I am doing at the moment with this language files.  Or have you ever tried to explain in a foreign language a feature on forum to someone? Hard as well. Do you know, how much time it takes me to read, to understand and to reply to your long posts? It takes hours. And thats why I will stop with this now.
Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 06:40:45 pm by Ruth

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #13 –

Ruth, you've repeatedly said what the English words should be. Said they were wrong. They should be changed. We actually agree on that.
Yes ignorieren is 'nonsense" in English too (or close to it)..

What we do not agree on are the English words you think they should be. And in fact, it was the English version of the German word you believe it should be (disallow) that got me even more confused (In fact "disallow" IS used in the groups permissions).

I've said numerous times what German words you use in German translation is not my concern - I don't speak German, and I won't be using the translations, although I suggested on two occasions some German words that may mean what I believe the better English words would be in place of the English words  that are used now, just to be clear what I was saying the English words mean.

I've also said that it's quite possible that the meanings of words in German may not match up nicely what Google Translate (et. al.) suggests the English equivalent is, I've certainly found that to be the case going from English to German.

Because you asked, yes,  for last 20 years of my career before I retired I was a Certification Engineer for various aircraft customers - my end customers for my documents and analysis were the FAA and JAA,  for customers in both the US and Europe, including Boeing and Airbus. I've authored hundreds, if not thousands of technical hardware documents, including a couple of original thesis that were the basis for some IEEE  and SAE guidance regarding specifications for ethernet end systems to fiber optics, because no standards or specifications for it existed that I could refer to at the time to show compliance to. I had to create it and justify it. That was back "in my prime". Those days are long gone.  If it doesn't look like it now, there's a reason, and that reason is why I'm retired. You betcha, it's a lot of work.
 
But what I do not do is different languages. At all. I didn't get that "gene" - spoken or coding doesn't matter. I'm not good at it. Spanish, German, French, Italian, Japanese, Thai, or Basic, Cobal, Fortran, PHP, it doesn't matter.  I admire those who are fluent in multiple languages, or can at least basically converse. Your knowledge of English as a "second language" is not bad, your knowledge of how EA works is far beyond mine. I have no intention to be rude in any way, that does not convey my respect.
 
But I have a pretty good handle on English.. And it looks to me like whomever decided "ignore", and especially "disallow" for X, in English didn't have a good handle on English.  That's not to criticize, I'm sure they did the best they could.

I  created this topic for the sole purpose of clarifying the logic and where and how it applied, because the English was confusing, if not misleading. And because I don't know if it will ever be changed, the next newbie admin may find that clarification here helpful.

I didn't create it to continue the translation debate.  Do what you have to do in German. I'll help with the English if you wish and if I can. I just don't want the English changed to be worse.  I have enough product instruction manuals translated from Chinese by Chinese into English that are mind boggling, and in fact, I rewrote one (for free) for a security system company in Taiwan about 4 years ago so English speakers could actually use it, once I figured out how to set the system up and configure it myself for my own use, because their 'English' version was worse than useless.

OK, we're no longer adding any value to this topic, the logic is explained, and that mission accomplished, so yes, let's close it out and go beat something else up somewhere else.. :smile: .
    
Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 11:32:51 pm by Steeley
// Deep inside every dilemma lies a solution that involves explosives //

Re: Board Permissions: [X} = Ignore

Reply #14 –

Quote from: Steeley – Ruth, you've repeatedly said what the English words should be. Said they were wrong. They should be changed. We actually agree on that. ... What we do not agree on are the English words you think they should be. And in fact, it was the English version of the German word you believe it should be (disallow) that got me even more confused (In fact "disallow" IS used in the groups permissions).

You almost forced me to repeat myself again and again, Steeley.  You always started to talk again about this "ignore" and you were also adressing me because of this "disallow".  I am still not sure, if you understand, that a word, which is telling about the function of X in all parts of the permissions, will most likely be the same word with X in another part of the permissions, the board access. No matter which word is used with X, it has to be always the same. Thats not a problem of languages, thats pure logic.

Quote from: Steeley – I have no intention to be rude in any way, that does not convey my respect.

If this is so, then why did you accuse me, that I would not accept a better english word for "disallow"? That's not true. I said nothing at all to this, me thinks. The way you talked to me yesterday, was almost the same like telling me to "shut up", because my english is not good enough. Thats not nice and not fair... and it did upset me, because I spent a lot of time by trying to explain things to you - in a foreign language.

Quote from: Steeley – ....it looks to me like whomever decided "ignore", and especially "disallow" for X, in English didn't have a good handle on English.

I think, that the mistakes on line 90 had been caused once by less concentration or controlling, maybe also an irritation about a new function there those days, very close to this language string and most likley a mistake by copy & paste. But I already said this. I don't think, that this mistakes were caused by less knowledge of the english language.

But I cannot judge at all, if "disallow" is bad english and if another english word could explain the function of X  a lot better.

Quote from: Steeley – I'll help with the English if you wish and if I can. I just don't want the English changed to be worse.

I don't feel responsible at all for the quality of words and texts in the english language files. But thank you for your offer to help me with english. What I would need at the moment, is help from someone, who speaks both languages almost perfect and has the technical knowledge to understand the difficulter parts of the language files in both languages very fast. There are technical parts in ACP, I dont understand at all, like data base settings or this "bad behavior" stuff. So I don't know, if things had been translated well once or not....and if they are still actuell.

If you are this good with english, like you said: I think, one day someone should check all this english help strings and compare them with texts in the admin panel and everywhere else on forum. The texts should fit well together. I do this at the moment with the german help strings. Thats an easy job, just time consuming, because you need to enable and disable every single function on forum to see each language string and the behavior of the function.

There are some outdated explanations, because a lot of things work different now, also some strings, which are no more in use and also duplicates of help strings in different files, which means, editing them in the wrong file won't have any effect. You could make a list of all strings, which could be removed or would need a changing. This would be very helpful for further translations - and for shorter language files one day. I lost track of this and could not make a list, because I also need to translate and I have already a lot of files in front of me for comparing and finding strings. Such a list would be easier to do for someone, who does not need to translate at the same time.

There are also some help strings with too much of text or too complicated texts, which a "technical newbie" won't understand at all. Other help strings tell almost nothing, they also could be removed - or someone tries to write new proper help texts there, where they would be needed. This is a job for someone, who is really good with english and knows how to write and how to explain things short and in a simple way, that most people would be able to understand. But this person also should know a lot about the functions and other technical stuff.... so I think, a team of native english speakers would be needed for this.