Change configuration keywords static, dynamic, static item and set

[martin-rueegg]

I've been working extensively with the configuration files and the documentation. I have found some terms to be confusing or "characterless" and would suggest to change them in order to improve understanding and readability, also avoiding lingual ambiguity or ambiguity with other terms.

The following therms I have found to be confusing.

set

Current	New	Comments
set	settings	The term "set" reminds me more of the actual linguistic noun set, rather than a short form of "settings" or "defaults" (as it was termed before). Hence, I consider settings to be more explanatory.

static and dynamic

These terms are not very self-explanatory. Even after understanding the concept, I find the terms still meaningless or rather a bit confusion. static seems to refer to the "existing" items, as in "already built", hence "static". Whereas dynamic might refer to the action of "creating/building". However, the static section is about changing items (hence also dynamic) while the dynamic section is not necessarily as dynamic as it might seem.

(I'm aware that the author is not a native English speaker [neither am I, btw.] it it might be the result of automatic translation.)

My suggestion would be to deprecate the two terms and replace them as follows:

Current	New	Comments
static	update	As explained above, the term static seems to refer to the existing items. However, the configuration here is really about the change done to those items - in terms of appearance or function. The term "change", however, seems not to be a fantastic keyword for a section. Hence update, which is already known in the IT world, particularly from SQL, where also existing entries are changed/updated.
dynamic	insert	Again, the term dynamic is not very explanatory. Analogous to the above entry, I'd suggest insert as it is adding/inserting new menuitems.

Static item

Current	New	Comments
item	process1 or change2	The main issue here is the ambiguity with the dynamic item entry. While they are similar, they are not the same. A dynamic item is always a item, never a menu. Also, it does not actually represent a menuitem, but rather the instruction on how to identify and change them.3

Footnotes

1. process might not be a great choice. It came up due to the term process instructions I've used in the documentation to describe, what those items do. ↩

2. change might be the better choice: In the update sections are the instructions how to change existing menuitems ... ↩

3. Of course, also update would work here, but if update would be used as the section name, ambiguity there must be avoided. ↩

[moudey]

I amended by adding the following while keeping the current names

set | settings

static | update
{
    item | change
}

dynamic | new | insert

I also plan to change the name of Shell after many users suggested it.

[martin-rueegg]

I amended by adding the following while keeping the current names

That sounds awesome!

Would you agree on the new names be the default, and the old names being "deprecated"? Then I would go and update the documentation accordingly.

I also plan to change the name of Shell after many users suggested it.

Yes, I can understand that. Firstly, most people don't know that explorer.exe in Windows is primarily the shell, and only kinda secondary a File Explorer. So for them the name "Shell" might not make much sense. And then, Shell is actually not a "shell" in the technical sense, but rather a tool to modify the real shell, explorer.exe.

Do you already have a name in mind?

Is there maybe a beautiful word in Arabic for customize, re-think, improve, enhance, make it your own, that could be transliterated?

[moudey]

Would you agree on the new names be the default, and the old names being "deprecated"? Then I would go and update the documentation accordingly.

But it is supposed to be published with the new version, right?

Do you already have a name in mind?

I already have the name "dija", which is short for my little girl, Khadija.

[martin-rueegg]

Would you agree on the new names be the default, and the old names being "deprecated"? Then I would go and update the documentation accordingly.

But it is supposed to be published with the new version, right?

Absolutely. Do you have an estimate on when to release? There might be some other "naming" issues in the functions, that we could discuss.

[martin-rueegg]

Do you already have a name in mind?

I already have the name "dija", which is short for my little girl, Khadija.

Sounds nice! - But you should ask her! Princesses do not like to be dubbed. And then it's confusing within your family whether you're referring to your work, or your love.... Just my two cents. :-)