Download options possible confusions #95
Comments
|
Looking at the website itself, here are a few possibilities: Option 1
Essentially, just add commas to separate the platform from the mention of the JRE. Option 2
Adding "edition" should make it clear, in conjuction with the "Standard Version - OmegaT 6.0.0" heading, that we're referring to the OmegaT (platform) edition with/without the applicable JRE. In this case, we whould also change the "Platform" table header to "Edition" Option 3
Somewhat redundant given the section heading, but it leaves zero room for ambiguity. Again, I think the "Platform" table header should be changed to "Edition" because the platform is no longer the primary focus of the entry in each row. Whichever option is chosen, I also think we should change the "Detailed instructions" table header to "Detailed description" or "Additional information", and create a blurb for each entry that doesn't currently have one that, for example, explains that "Windows with JRE" means a version of OmegaT that includes a JRE, which means there is no need to have Java installed on the system, or that a different version of Java can be installed on the system without interference between the version used by OmegaT and the system version. Similarly, the "without JRE" blurb would specify that OmegaT needs to be run with a version of Java already installed on the system. |
|
What about:
or
|
Changing "with" to "including" doesn't really change a great deal. The meaning is exactly the same, and you still need to make it part of one of the options I outlined originally. Also, it has to be "32-bit (64-bit) JRE for Windows", because the distinction isn't between 32-bit and 64-bit Windows. You can still use the 32-bit JRE on 64-bit Windows (why you'd do that, I'm not sure, but it can be done). So, using the 32-bit JRE as an example for each option, we'd get:
This actually makes option 2 more ambiguous, and adding a comma ("Windows edition, including a 32-bit JRE") isn't much of an improvement.
More or less the same issue as with "including":
Now, both options 1 and 2 are very ambiguous, even with a comma. On a purely preferential note, I also kind of like the "with JRE" and "without JRE" parallel. As variants on Options 2 and 3, we could also use:
You could use "package" or "version" instead of "edition" in option 2. Hmm... I just had another idea:
In this variant, you could use "including a" instead of "packaged with":
You could also keep "without a" instead of using "with no":
One final idea would be to redesign the table slighly:
Of course, in a proper HTML table, the Windows platform cells would be merged and centered. Just a few extra thoughts... |
|
I like this proposal Windows installer packaged with 32-bit JRE except that "archive" sounds like old and not used anymore. What about: macOS package, Unsigned |
I'm not tied to "archive". I got the idea of "installer" and "archive" from the file types that get downloaded.
That works! |
|
I just sent a PR to implement this. |
"Windows with JRE" can be interpreted as "OmegaT for Windows, with a JRE included in Windows", when we mean "OmegaT, including Windows JRE".
That's something we should find a way to fix.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: