Difference between revisions of "Talk:Describe Chatter"
m (→Date Of Birth: explain rollback to "date-of-birth" with more detail than fit in the article's history) |
(refer to the precedent of the poor translation into English at Profile > 2nd Life from DATA_ONLINE DATA_BORN DATA_PAYINFO) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Profile > 2nd Life Precedent == | |||
Ah. News to newbie me. The LL client already has established precedent here. LL has already provided a poor translation into English at Profile > 2nd Life as a precedent defining what conventional is here. I think we could/ should tweak the script to match that precedent. I'll try that next. -- [[User:Ppaatt Lynagh|Ppaatt Lynagh]] 08:31, 3 November 2007 (PDT) | |||
== Date Of Birth == | == Date Of Birth == | ||
Revision as of 08:31, 3 November 2007
Profile > 2nd Life Precedent
Ah. News to newbie me. The LL client already has established precedent here. LL has already provided a poor translation into English at Profile > 2nd Life as a precedent defining what conventional is here. I think we could/ should tweak the script to match that precedent. I'll try that next. -- Ppaatt Lynagh 08:31, 3 November 2007 (PDT)
Date Of Birth
DATA_BORN is the Second Life identifier for this.
I think our old phrase "date-of-birth" is the correct English to represent that source code, not our new coinage "date-of-creation". It is the second birth that we are discussing, I think. -- Ppaatt Lynagh 29 October 2007
- I notice alongside the drearily conventional phrase "date-of-birth" we also had the drearily conventional phrase "legal name" representing DATA_NAME, together with "online" and "not online" representing DATA_ONLINE. The history of English phrases we use to represent DATA_PAYINFO I do not yet understand. -- Ppaatt Lynagh 06:09, 2 November 2007 (PDT)
- By the discussion above, I have now rolled the article back to the drearily conventional phrase "date-of-birth", as in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOB, away from the new coinage "date-of-creation". Maybe DOB is by now our consensus least-awful design choice here. -- Ppaatt Lynagh 06:09, 2 November 2007 (PDT)
Has No Money
Sounds like we're confused over whether we talk of second money denoted in L$, which any avatar may have, and the real money that comes from a registered credit card, denoted in Euros or US$ or whatever.
I see the history says:
Your account can be credited money without having payment info; payment info can be removed from the account after using it.
This comment explains the new code vs. the old code that was:
// Convert to string from PAYMENT_INFO
string toPayInfoEcho(string data)
{
integer payInfo = (integer) data;
if (payInfo == 0)
{
return "Has no money";
}
else if (payInfo & PAYMENT_INFO_USED)
{
return "Has spent money";
}
else if (payInfo & PAYMENT_INFO_ON_FILE)
{
return "Has money";
}
else
{
return data;
}
I don't yet understand this change.
For me, the new code isn't as easy to read at a glance as the old code. I see the sample results have not changed. I suspect that me rerunning the code might produce different sample results.