Should the items in any non-translatables glossary get the purple background colour instead of the orange? For reasons of consistency.
They are consistent with other glossary entries and just to tell them apart from default non-translatables.
Nice try. But a glossary is a list with at least two columns. So actually these non-translatable lists don't qualify as a real glossary :).
Perhaps it'd even be clearer to change their names to Non-translatables lists? Anyway, I'd welcome it very much if items in these lists would always be purple.
Where are the times when our great terminologist MB cleared these complex terminological questions with his wisdom and authority?
Since this is the coffee corner where all kind of Quatsch can be ventilated, some more info about these fascinating lists. Ideally:
I have recently read the similar discussion on the academic strictness of terminology at ProZ.com:
To me, the KudoZ entries are one of the best online resources for translators just because they go beyond that strict terminology definitions.
I bet you always want to win in football too?
> Let's say it one more time, this time loud: NON-TRANSLATABLES LIST.
I am not a big fan of such definite categorization. One can call them as they find it more appropriate in their own translation context. Users do not need to follow any strict naming rules. In CafeTran, such non-translatables can be also mixed with regular glossary entries in the same file if you precede them with ! character.
>I am not a big fan of such definite categorization
Actually, I'm a pretty relaxed person too.
Okay, then you can forget about the point of renaming the glossaries.