In the .info file for book.module:
-description = Allows users to structure site pages in a hierarchy or outline.
+description = Allows users to create and organize related content in a hierarchy or outline.
I make two changes:
1) Changing pages -> content: Page is used far too frequently in Drupal core, as pointed out by the UMN Usability testing.
2) Changing structure -> create and organize related: 'Structure' implies the content has already been created (especially combined with pages), so I use two verbs for each realistic part.
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #7 | book_description.patch | 1.15 KB | birdmanx35 |
| #2 | book_description.patch | 1.16 KB | birdmanx35 |
| book_description.patch | 673 bytes | birdmanx35 |
Comments
Comment #1
keith.smith commentedOK. I like it. Very good points.
Of course, to be picky:
- the book module also allows arranging unrelated content. There's no requirement that stuff be related. :)
- I don't guess hierarchy and outline are redundant, but it is two words for essentially the same idea.
Neither of these points, though, are particularly compelling. (By that, I mean my points, not your points.)
Is this description also used on the admin page or is that in the code? I'm not where I can look easily. If they are separate, they should be kept in sync as much as possible.
Comment #2
birdmanx35 commentedAbout your first point- suggesting what people use it for is generally what these descriptions are for, no? Also, the description in the install file says related.
And your second- I would be fine with deleting hierarchy. I know what it means, and I'd imagine you do too; but outline is probably more well-known ;)
That is in the .info file, so that description shows up on the admin page.
For reference, from book.install:31:
'description' => t('A <em>book page</em> is a page of content, organized into a collection of related entries collectively known as a <em>book</em>. A <em>book page</em> automatically displays links to adjacent pages, providing a simple navigation system for organizing and reviewing structured content.'),I'd suggest we changed structured to organized, but that's already been said, so it's redundant. Structured still isn't the best term.
I also really don't like the way 'automatically displays links to adjacent pages,' is worded, so I think we should review that... not that I have any ideas about that. Any other suggestions, while we're at it?
This patch is rerolled to keep the comments aligned with the description, and it implements your second suggestion, but not any changes to the install description (yet).
Comment #3
keith.smith commentedNo, really, I think this is a good change. I'll RTBC it now if you're done with it, or did you want to change something else? I'm not sure I know what the "install description" is.
I think I patched that content type description into its current state, so I'm not the best person to look at that, since I immediately flash back to the twenty odd iterations it went through before being committed. That issue was #89196, there may be some versions there that give you additional ideas.
Comment #4
birdmanx35 commentedI think I am done with this, for now.
Comment #5
keith.smith commentedThis is a small, subtle change but a good one, I think.
Comment #6
catchNo longer applies cleanly.
Comment #7
birdmanx35 commentedThis is a reroll of the same patch in #2.... should be ready to RTBC but I haven't done this for a while, so who knows.
Comment #8
Anonymous (not verified) commentedComment #9
dries commentedCommitted to CVS HEAD. Thanks.
Comment #10
Anonymous (not verified) commentedAutomatically closed -- issue fixed for two weeks with no activity.