I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 28ccec4

grammatically this is an edge case if it is correct or not. But for
consistency I am ok with it

On 20 September 2016 at 12:38, Luca Marzo notifications@github.com wrote:

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 28ccec4

28ccec4

This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application
https://github.com/joomla/jissues at issues.joomla.org/joomla-cms/12103
https://issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/12103.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#12103 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABPH8ZZvJZ_9a-cnI2X10CknrHa_z2ZZks5qr6mBgaJpZM4KBaxm
.

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
http://brian.teeman.net/

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 28ccec4

RTC

I am going to set this and the related PR to needs review so they are not merged until we make a decision on them all as I am not convinced it is correct.

@brianteeman still in needs review? And if what is the case?

The options page is for the component and not for all templates - so writing "templates: options" is not correct as that would imply they are settings for all the templates
the problem with the core is that we should therefore be using the name of the component here
But sometimes the component has a plural name eg com_templates and sometimes it has a singular name eg com_newsfeed

So at the end of the day I feel that on the options page we should always use the singular. as it refers to the settings of the singular item - a component and not a plural - the settings for all the items created/managed by the component

if anything the actual 100% correct string would be com_templates: options but thats not friendly
and changing to Templates: Options is just not correct

sorry for the rant - this applies to all the similar PRs

The options page is for the component and not for all templates

Even that isnt true for the options on some components. Which is why for example articles is articles:options (plural)

It could even be argued that there is a missing apostrophe as they are the options of the component which is a possesive

What's the deal with this and its companion PRs?

they are waiting a decision - I expressed my view above

I would say singular both in title and sidebar, maybe easier to close the PR and start from scratch

why not ask the en-GB working group

@brianteeman stop making sense :-)

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 28ccec4

I happen to agree with @brianteeman on this one. His explanation makes very much sense me think