Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

reiterate that the sharing is public #9

Draft
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

chrisgorgo
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@chrisgorgo
Copy link
Contributor Author

ping

@vsoch
Copy link

vsoch commented Sep 28, 2017

pong!

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ We will keep the private portion (name, contact information etc.) of your data i

**Letting us use and share your data is voluntary. However, you must be willing to share your data in this way in order to participate in this study. If you are not willing, you cannot participate in this study.**

By signing below, you agree to provide your data for future research. You agree that these may be shared with other investigators at other institutions from around the world. The details, results, and implications of these studies are unknown.
By signing below, you agree to provide your data for future research. You agree that these may be shared with other investigators at other institutions from around the world as well as the general public. The details, results, and implications of these studies are unknown.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

shouldn't it then be in both versions?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The other version has two levels of access so not all data will be available to general public.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah, I have missed that 2nd version was talking about "authorized investigators".
BUT it is the "two access types version", where some data is shared publicly, so it would only be logical to extend that sentence in the second version with similar ending, e.g.

with other authorized investigators at other institutions from around the world, and some data will be shared with the general public.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

don't you think @chrisfilo so? ;)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In general I agree, but I am more concerned about the workflow for updating all of the translations along with the English version. We need to come up with something.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeap, the same here. Someone should check how it is done in other text documents oriented projects. I know how it is done typically for shorter ones in software projects where each sentence in English is pretty much a key for which translations are then assigned.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also would help to separate them all into different documents asap

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, translations workflow is somewhat streamlined (separate files, versioning), so it might indeed be good to add these explicit statements for now at least into English version.

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member

oh, well -- this is the oldest unresolved PR in my history probably so would be great to bring it to resolution one way (finish+merge) or another (close). I rebased so we can take advantage of versioning added, and added that statement to OBC-ULT-2T version. Consulting to @con/i18n maintainers on either we should proceed with this and then probably add it to all translations, or just keep as is and close?

@yarikoptic yarikoptic marked this pull request as draft March 14, 2023 01:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants