Re: [Clops-users] AllOptions and other ways of defining option groups

[Julien C. <jul...@gm...>]

oops not in the mailing list. fixing it

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Julien Charles <jul...@gm...>wrote:

> Ok so I will be more precise.
> The main problem is name collision, coupled with template translation, and
> custom user template things.
> Here what we do is to reserve a word for group naming. If we choose
> AllOptions, it will be typically translated by a section called 'AllOptions
> options' which I don't want. It will change most likely to a section with a
> name like 'All options'. Then in the average case the user will have an
> option which will be named All, and it will eventually collide with my
> translation and the user will be unhappy because we didn't tell him that All
> was already a reserved word somehow because the template use this
> convention. So I agree to do a special case, but tell me which user friendly
> header I could put up in the html.
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Fintan Fairmichael <fi...@gm...>wrote:
>
>>
>> Could it be a more documentation friendly name instead? Like just 'All', I
>>> mean I don't want to have to make a special case in the doc generation to
>>> make up a more user friendly name.
>>>
>>
>> While I do no agree that AllOptions is somehow not user-friendly it can be
>> easily changed. Just edit the template.
>>
>
>