Le 01/01/2011 06:05, Robert Haas a écrit :
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> On tor, 2010-12-30 at 11:03 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> No, quite the opposite. With the other approach, you needed:
>>> constraints cannot be used on views
>>> constraints cannot be used on composite types
>>> constraints cannot be used on TOAST tables
>>> constraints cannot be used on indexes
>>> constraints cannot be used on foreign tables
>>> With this, you just need:
>>> constraints can only be used on tables
>> At the beginning of this thread you said that the error messages should
>> focus on what you tried to do, not what you could do instead.
> Yeah, and I still believe that. I'm having difficulty coming up with
> a workable approach, though. It would be simple enough if we could
> /* translator: first %s is a feature, second %s is a relation type */
> %s cannot be used on %s
> ...but I think this is likely to cause some translation headaches.
Actually, this is simply not translatable in some languages. We had the
same issue on pgAdmin, and we resolved this by having quite a big number
of new strings to translate. Harder one time for the translator, but
results in a much better experience for the user.
>> Also, in this particular case, the user could very well assume that a
>> TOAST table or a foreign table is a table.
> There's a limited amount we can do about confused users, but it is
> true that the negative phrasing is better for that case.
It's at least better for the translator.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-01-01 15:00:46|
|Subject: Re: and it's not a bunny rabbit, either|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-01-01 14:15:45|
|Subject: Re: Sync Rep Design|