Besnik Bleta
2013-03-23 19:01:56 UTC
Hello,
There's been a little change in about.en.xhtml file, which
I spotted while updating my translation of it:
"Documents that aren't free are locked to some particular product or
company."
has been changed to
"Documents that aren't free are locked to some particular software or
company."
The commit messages says: software is not product
(r1985 | guest-marado | 2013-03-15 13:42:21 +0200 (Fri, 15 Mar 2013) | 2
lines )
It sounds to me as a bit of diverting readers' attention
from the real direction here: proprietary software vendors.
That's why I'd like to ask the opinion of the more experienced.
On IRC we had a little chat with two of the colleagues there,
and their opinions vary.
My understanding is that the section deals with software which
lock freedom. Those are, almost all, products of certain
companies. So stating that those are "products", goes along
our efforts to point to the fact that those are intended to
be how they are, proprietary, intended to lock users.
"Software" is the big bag for all kind of them, while our
intention are the proprietary ones. So, at least, it should
be stated that they're proprietary, if going back to "product"
is not agreed upon.
"Software product" was proposed as an alternative by nicooo.
I'd like to hear your opinions before updating my translation.
Best,
Besnik
There's been a little change in about.en.xhtml file, which
I spotted while updating my translation of it:
"Documents that aren't free are locked to some particular product or
company."
has been changed to
"Documents that aren't free are locked to some particular software or
company."
The commit messages says: software is not product
(r1985 | guest-marado | 2013-03-15 13:42:21 +0200 (Fri, 15 Mar 2013) | 2
lines )
It sounds to me as a bit of diverting readers' attention
from the real direction here: proprietary software vendors.
That's why I'd like to ask the opinion of the more experienced.
On IRC we had a little chat with two of the colleagues there,
and their opinions vary.
My understanding is that the section deals with software which
lock freedom. Those are, almost all, products of certain
companies. So stating that those are "products", goes along
our efforts to point to the fact that those are intended to
be how they are, proprietary, intended to lock users.
"Software" is the big bag for all kind of them, while our
intention are the proprietary ones. So, at least, it should
be stated that they're proprietary, if going back to "product"
is not agreed upon.
"Software product" was proposed as an alternative by nicooo.
I'd like to hear your opinions before updating my translation.
Best,
Besnik