91–100 of 180 posts
Unfortunately, details take time and time takes money.
For a business's survival, the company's relative positioning in the market, access to sales and marketing channels, financing are much stronger concerns.
This is a designer longing for endless tinkering.
Sure it’s doable, but trivial things are now non-trivial.
Ignoring i8n is also a significant issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am baffled why you are inserting good and evil into this. He just seems to want to work at companies that value craft and attention to detail. It just like the jobs quote about the back of the furniture also being attractive.
Ironically, your comment probably exemplifies the “Californian Ideology” the parent comment is criticizing. “Why would you consider good or evil when talking about how you want to spend the overwhelming majority of your productive life”.
It's a tradeoff. I love projects where I can "sweat the details" and refine not just wording but typography, padding, visual alignment, layout, edge cases, colors, workflow, etc. And where the back-end, QA, doc teams are similarly able to hone their work to perfection. But I know that this isn't always Pareto optimal. Sometimes your user, customer, and business are better off if you swallow your pride and deliver an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'll have to look up the way i18n frameworks work, but no the "(s)" is not worse. It is far better because it's a simple string that the framework can substitute without embedded business logic trying to manipulate the individual characters in a way that only works in one language.
Huh? "(s)", itself, only works in one language! Other languages (and even English, sometimes) don't always pluralize by appending lettters to the end of words, so the parenthesized suffix thing very regularly doesn't even work. And who exactly is talking about "embedding" business logic in the i18n framework? Every serious framework I've used has supported placeholders, so at the application level you just select bet…
That doesn't prevent a good translation framework from working properly, but it proves why the sample code in your example & the OP would not work.
https://www.unicode.org/cldr/charts/43/supplemental/language...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Holy moly, and I thought French (my mother tongue) was complicated due to conjugation. I'm fascinated by what possible context could call for this many variations on how you spell/pronounce a number. Any chance you know of a good article on this? (I could ask ChatGPT, but I'm trying to let go of that crutch.)
I'm not a linguist so I can't send any articles that explain the origins of this mess. But here are actual examples of usage: dwa ptaki (two birds) dwoje ludzi (two persons) dwie dziewczyny (two girls) idę z dwiema dziewczynami (I'm walking with two girls) dałem kwiaty dwom dziewczynom (I gave flowers to two girls) kanapa dla dwojga (a sofa for two - gender unspecified) dałem śniadanie dwojgu (I served breakfast for…
ena ptica (one bird), dve ptici (two birds), tri ptice (three birds)
As well as 6 grammatical cases and 3 genders. And a number of special cases
If this is your biggest concern at a company (regarding the UI at least), you are miles ahead of us. Congrats
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am baffled why you are inserting good and evil into this. He just seems to want to work at companies that value craft and attention to detail. It just like the jobs quote about the back of the furniture also being attractive.
Ironically, your comment probably exemplifies the “Californian Ideology” the parent comment is criticizing. “Why would you consider good or evil when talking about how you want to spend the overwhelming majority of your productive life”.
Something really changed after the first dotcom bubble. Maybe it was my own youthful naïveté (as someone living in Sacramento desperately wishing I lived in that much cooler city to the west). Maybe it was the last drops of that wave Hunter S Thompson talked about breaking.
This is the Californian Ideology in a blog post. The implication that title and intro mean to imply is working for companies that build products that are not evil and hostile to their users. But the call to action is to.. embed logic in the programs to pluralize properly (in English). It's possible to write evil software that pluralizes words. It's possible to write beneficial software that does not pluralize words.…
It seems like a douchey post but it’s not. Just browsing the internet makes me regularly question how difficult it is keeping the tech industry full of people that give a shit. Software ate the world and along with it came a contingent that don’t care enough about it. The choppy first page load, the non-smooth scrolling, the ads janking in, shifting layout and content in unpredictable ways, and finally the bombarding…