[TYPO3-core] Renaming the generic term "Template" (as used for TS Template)?

[Roland]

hi jigal,

i totally agree with you. you can count on me if consesus is found on new
terms.

kind regards

roland



Jigal van Hemert <jigal.van.hemert at typo3.org> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 19-12-2013 23:33, Roland wrote:
>> what do you think about this change request:
>> 
>> https://review.typo3.org/#/c/25693/
> 
> Maybe we should first reach consensus about a new term (if at all) for it.
> 
>> my thoughts about it:
>> 
>> ++ "TypoScript Template" is a much more appropriate term than "Template"
> 
> I would take it even further:
> - "TypoScript" (instead of "TypoScript Template" or "Template"): although
> it may have started as the template of a page it currently is more about
> other configuration than the template of a page.
> - "TypoScript record" for the database record which contains TypoScript;
> also the record we store in pages and folders
> - "page TSconfig" and "user TSconfig"; drop the use of TypoScript here
> (only abbreviated as TS) to emphasize the difference between TypoScript
> and TSconfig (although they share a common syntax)
> 
>> ++ The term "Template" was/is confusing - so you could/should call the
>> usage of the term "Template" a bug (at least UX-wise)
> 
> In historic perspective it was probably logical. It's still possible to
> build a page without any HTML file and thus the TypoScript 'template' was
> the template for a page.
> 
>> ++ as it seems fixing this bug in TYPO3 6.2 would automatically fix it in
>> all older versions without any further work which had to be done (you could
>> argue that this is a nice side effect)
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean, but this change will most likely not be
> backported to earlier releases.
> 
>> ++ i think we should not clutter TYPO3 6.2 with new locallang labels or
>> locallang files
> 
> It's not about "cluttering", but we have a strict policy about not
> changing labels for a good reason: all translations would be out of sync
> and translators have no way to know that the original has changed.
> Furthermore, it would also influence older releases which should not be
> affected by such changes.
> 
> IMO the way to go is:
> 1. reach consensus about a new term (if at all)
> 2. create issues for the core bug tracker and the documentation bug tracker
> 3. create patches