New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixed a few typos #11302

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 24, 2015

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@sprintr
Contributor

sprintr commented Jun 23, 2015

Fixes a few typos in preferences description

CC: @abose

abose added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 24, 2015

@abose abose merged commit 96f24bf into adobe:master Jun 24, 2015

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@abose

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@abose

abose Jun 24, 2015

Contributor

Thanks @sprintr . merging.

Contributor

abose commented Jun 24, 2015

Thanks @sprintr . merging.

@sprintr sprintr deleted the sprintr:pref-desc-typos branch Jun 24, 2015

@rawat11

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rawat11

rawat11 Jul 13, 2015

@sprintr Could you please check these strings (Do they hold specific meaning ?)

  • "True to allow unfiltered for in" (should it be translated as "True to allow unfiltering for inbound elements"?)
  • "True to allow stupidity"

@abose Can you check as well

rawat11 commented Jul 13, 2015

@sprintr Could you please check these strings (Do they hold specific meaning ?)

  • "True to allow unfiltered for in" (should it be translated as "True to allow unfiltering for inbound elements"?)
  • "True to allow stupidity"

@abose Can you check as well

@sprintr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sprintr

sprintr Jul 13, 2015

Contributor

"True to allow unfiltered for in" (should it be translated as "True to allow unfiltering for inbound elements"?)

True to allow unfiltered for in seems fine to me. Reference

"True to allow stupidity"

This can be changed to True if blocking ('...Sync') methods can be used. Reference

Contributor

sprintr commented Jul 13, 2015

"True to allow unfiltered for in" (should it be translated as "True to allow unfiltering for inbound elements"?)

True to allow unfiltered for in seems fine to me. Reference

"True to allow stupidity"

This can be changed to True if blocking ('...Sync') methods can be used. Reference

@rawat11

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rawat11

rawat11 Jul 13, 2015

@sprintr Thanks. I do not have much idea on this.
If you are fine with first. then let it be like that. For second we can change it, leaving it to you.

rawat11 commented Jul 13, 2015

@sprintr Thanks. I do not have much idea on this.
If you are fine with first. then let it be like that. For second we can change it, leaving it to you.

@sprintr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sprintr

sprintr Jul 13, 2015

Contributor

In the review of #11318, All of True were changed to the JavaScript Boolean true, so should we do the same for default locale?

@rawat11 @abose @MarcelGerber

Contributor

sprintr commented Jul 13, 2015

In the review of #11318, All of True were changed to the JavaScript Boolean true, so should we do the same for default locale?

@rawat11 @abose @MarcelGerber

@abose

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@abose

abose Jul 13, 2015

Contributor

@sprintr seems logical to use js boolean for me too.

Contributor

abose commented Jul 13, 2015

@sprintr seems logical to use js boolean for me too.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment