Steve Sloan wrote:
How about omitting the mi / ko ? Making it unspecified, doing EXACTLY what you want: doing the same as what we read now in English, the short labels are ambiguous.Mark wrote:In a typical real UI there are three things a button can say: 1) What the user does by pressing it ("Accept", "Dismiss") 2) What the computer does when the user presses it ("Apply", "Search") 3) What the user notionally communicates by pressing it ("OK")For 2), for instance, you can't just say "Sisku" on the button, as that (as I understand it) means "Look, a search/something searches!" which makes no sense in context. Would the button read "ko sisku" ("Hey you, Search!")?I think {sisku} would be fine, as most UI labels are already ambiguous as to the actor. For example, "Get Mail" and "Print" are actions for the application to perform, but "Write" and "Reply" are actions the user wants to perform. You could add {ko}/{mi}, but that would probably just make things more confusing: is {mi} the user, or the application?
I REALLY don't get the UI discussion issue.The complain is: it's not clear who the subject is ... aren't we trying to obtain that (ambiguously) ? And if you do want to show the actor, it's usually the program who is acting (so ko).
1) I have no idea how to do. For Accept - "mi fitytu'i"?Wouldn't an "Accept"/"Decline" dialog just be phrased as a {xa} question, with {go'i}/{na} buttons? You could also make it less ambiguous by phrasing as a {mo} question with buttons for the appropriate action (e.g. "Save"/"Discard").3), at least, is fairly clear - "je'e". In fact, I'm glad for this, as it eliminates the ugliness of having to use the English "OK" (as in "All yourdata has been lost <OK>") I'm not sure if {je'e} is really any better than "OK" ... "All your data has been lost: [je'e] [oi] [a'onai]"
A single "ok" choice je'e would be correct: "Yes I read the message you."But in case of a multi option je'e would be very confusing. (As Steve explained)
-- Steve