> So, for a computer that doesn't understand semantics
> expressed in English, "locked" and "no" are exactly
> the same. That's redundant.
> There must be a practical difference between "locked"
> and "no". Two values with the same meaning (must not
> translate) are a bad idea.
The two values have different meanings:
- no = it is not translatable
- locked = it is translatable but currently locked
The two values may trigger the same action or different ones depending on what the program is doing.
For example:
- If the program is looking at modifying the content: same action -> do not change.
- If the program is creating some word count report: different actions -> entries with 'locked' are counted as translatable but locked, the ones with 'no' is counted as not translatable.
- If the program is performing QA: possibly different actions -> entries with 'locked' are verified, but not the ones with 'no',
I'm sure Fredrik and other have other examples like this.
Cheers,
-yves
