Hm, I did not find this in the forum, but I am pretty sure we alreday had this.
We all know that the statistics still have "room for improvement", as a well-known developer might say. However, one very simple improvement would be to show the checked segments.
Until now, I can filter for unchecked segments to get an idea of the work I need to do. However, this is not ideal (checked segments are then unvisible, so I need to unfilter the project, but then the stats become unusable).
CafeTran can perform statistics on any filtered segments in your project. Just choose Filter > Checked segments before.
It is about being able to follow the stats for checked segments without being forced to filter (that means that any already checked segments fall out of sight).
Also annoying in this context: When you re-apply the filter the cursor jumps back to the first unchecked (simply assume you have skipped several of the first unchecked segments because you need to discuss it, do a lot of further research etc. pp. – then this "workaround" is somehow cumbersome).
> that means that any already checked segments fall out of sight.
On the contrary, the filtered checked segments are in sight.
So filter on checked segments to get the statistics of the checked segments and have them in view too. This quick and simple method can be applied to any type of filter to see the filtered segments statistics. Again, no increased complexity of the statistics interface is needed because you can achieve what you wish with the current method, that is, see the statistics of the checked segments. However, I guess you wish to have some kind of parallel statistics both for checked and unchecked segments at the same time.
(if not using memory/homogenity stats, most people won't, I assume).
Not really complex. We actually have less segment states than maybe in other tools, but why is the checked segment state not reflected here?
> why is the checked segment state not reflected here?
1. To avoid information overload and keep the statistics interface as fast, simple and intuitive as possible.
2. You can perform the separate statistics on the checked segments via one click.
> 1. To avoid information overload and keep the statistics interface as fast, simple and intuitive as possible.
Then we should skip the Target segments anyway, shouldn't we? CT has three segments states, but one of them is dismissed in the normal Stats view (this is not an "exotic" state such as locked or any of the others than can be filtered).
> 2. You can perform the separate statistics on the checked segments via one click.
Yes, but I am working in the "unchecked segments" filter.