[Tracker] setting wording wrong

[j_freeman@…]

Under the Windows section of Tracker's settings, there's an option for a "Transparent Selection Box". When that is selected, we actually get a 'translucent' (more accurately) selection box. 'Transparent' is what we have by default.

[axeld]

Sorry, I think you're wrong. Translucent means: "let the light through, but doesn't let you look through" - that's not what this box is, because it's transparent :-) When it's not selected, it's only a frame selection rectangle - which is, of course, completely transparent, too, but I guess one can figure out the difference. Anyway, maybe this should be reversed, so that there just stands "selection outline rectangle", and make the other option the default.

[j_freeman@…]

Translucency is simply partial transparency, like a colored pane of glass; it lets you look through yet tints your vision. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_%28graphic%29.)

But if you don't agree, that's fine. I do think it needs to be reworded though, because the first time I saw this option I didn't know what it could refer to.

[axeld]

I agree that a rewording makes sense, that's why I kept this bug open. But you're still wrong with translucency vs. transparency, sorry :-) For a correct differentiation, see the first paragraph of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translucency

[j_freeman@…]

That paragraph (like the article it's contained in) deals with optical transparency, which is probably the most common, everyday use for the word. However, in dealing with graphical transparency, translucency is simply a 'Degree of transparency' below 100%; under this definition, your common "light-diffusal" meaning of translucency is a term for a specific range of translucency, e.g. that of closer to ~100% (~0% transparency) as in wax paper.

To get even more technical, one definition of "diffuse" is to "make less brilliant; soften." and this is what the Tracker option does exactly, so it could indeed correctly be called translucency.

However, we're basically talking semantics, so I can't say I'm wrong or that you're wrong. But as the wording is now, it's at best misleading and at worse (as was in my case) confusing. Perhaps replace "transparent" with "tinted" or something along those lines?

[axeld]

Changed in r17688.