GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 274451
Access keys displayed in "define views... dialog" where it should not
Last modified: 2013-09-13 00:49:48 UTC
Please fill in this template when reporting a bug, unless you know what you are doing. Description of Problem: Language=Greek (didnt test other Languages or C) if i follow this menu path in all components (mailer, contacts etc): view -> current view -> define views... i see a dialogue window for defining views for (calendar for example) where there is a list of names that include access keys. it is like "Day V_iew" but it should be "Day View". i think that problem comes from here: #: views/calendar/galview.xml.h:2 msgid "_Day View" msgstr "" #: views/calendar/galview.xml.h:3 msgid "_List View" msgstr "" #: views/calendar/galview.xml.h:4 msgid "_Month View" msgstr "" #: views/calendar/galview.xml.h:5 msgid "_Work Week View" msgstr "" These stings should not have access key. Correct me if i am wrong. Steps to reproduce the problem: 1. 2. 3. Actual Results: Expected Results: How often does this happen? Additional Information:
i tested it with American English language, the result is the same.
yeah, right. i'll target this to 2.3, this is really confusing. one can access the views by choosing a view and then using "edit". this requires string changes, adding dependency to bug 236276.
i have submitted a patch to e-p list
Created attachment 47427 [details] [review] patch sent to e-p on 2005-04-28
*** Bug 273999 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
sigh... what to do to get this in? :-/
sigh... punting this to 2.5 because of the string freeze.
A couple more issues with this dialog: - The dialog title is not translated - The column name is not translated
reassigning
this is NOTABUG. those accelerators are indeed used, because the names of the views are used as menu items in the main menu. therefore closing as NOTABUG. guenther: thanks for pointing me on this.
Look at the dialog again and tell me this is NOTABUG :-) Seriously, if there's no way to fix this we should file bugs against some api for lacking support for removing the accelerators when they are not needed.
guenther: this is an invitation for a discussion.
This is fixed by Gilles in head.