Pluralise taxonomy terms in Umami's Recipe Category vocabulary

Attaching a basic patch that pluralises these terms.

#DrupalNorth2018

This feels like a very debatable thing in terms of how the taxonomy is used. Obviously it looks much better on the taxonomy page but on each recipe it is displayed like

And here it is more like a facet or recipe type where having a plural doesn't really work.

It's good to know you have consensus. My reasoning is based around http://accidental-taxonomist.blogspot.com/2012/07/deviating-from-taxonom... - specifically...

The standard is to use plural for terms that are countable nouns. The idea is is that when users select a term they will find multiple documents, records, or digital assets (in plural) indexed with or categorized by the term. Enterprise and ecommerce taxonomies, however, tend to be comprised of multiple taxonomy facets, whereby the user selects terms from a combination of facets. Taxonomy terms within facets then appear to user to be filters, scopes, aspects, or attributes, rather than simply a category of plural objects. For example, a document type facet might have terms in the singular describing the type of document: Article, Report, Form, Application, Interview, etc., all in the singular to answer the question “what kind of document.” The names of the facets themselves may also be in singular, rather than plural, so as to “limit by” a facet, such as: Document type, Location, Topic, Department, etc.

I feel recipe category is very similar to a document type facet. But I'm also happy to be overruled and a choice made by the team - had to ask the question though.

I am picking this up at #uoe-d8-contribution Edinburgh University Drupal 8 Contribution day 2018.

Only issue was the patch file seems not to want to patch on my Mac (Formatting issues?), so I ended up formatting the patch file contents for Mac to work on my system. Then the patch worked fine. I can offer to upload a generated patch file for comparison.

No comment on the discussion regarding approach.

I contributed the quick patch during a code sprint day and I very much see it as a short term fix. I think it would be fine to put in place for a couple of point releases until a better solution can be worked on. @jwlockhart It looks like the test bot was able to apply the patch?

Tagging for upcoming contribution days.

I think the reason lolcode's patch in #2 doesn't apply is because since they created it, a typo in "mozzarella" was fixed, so the patch with the old spelling no longer applied. I created a new patch and that ended up being the only difference between the two! So here is what essentially amounts to a reroll.

Confirmed the patch applies and the taxonomy terms are plural per the attached screenshot.

@BrightBold

I just took the latest code (8.7.x) and found there is change in the second line in receipes.csv file:

Vegan chocolate and nut brownies,vegan-chocolate-nut-brownies.jpg,"A stack of chocolate and pecan brownies, sprinkled with pecan crumbs and crushed walnut, fresh out of the oven","Scrumptious vegan chocolate brownies that are rich, fudgy, and nutty. These delights have a surprise hint of coconut making them the perfect indulgence. Serve warm with a little vanilla dairy-free ice cream!",Umami,Snack,20,20,40,medium,"6 tbsp sunflower oil, 80g vegan dark chocolate, 170g plain flour, 80g coconut flour, 1 tsp baking powder, 9 tsp cocoa powder, 100g caster sugar, 3 tbsp of maple syrup, 1/4 tsp sea salt, 1 tsp vanilla extract, 230ml unsweetened organic soya milk, 100g pecan nuts, 80g walnut halves",vegan-chocolate-nut-brownies.html,12,"Baking,Chocolate,Vegan,Dairy-free",recipes/vegan-chocolate-and-nut-brownies

Can you please verify at your end on this? And if changes are there then please share the latest patch accordingly.

Try this. (Quickly! Before someone changes recipes.csv again!)

@BrightBold

I am on it. :)

@BrightBold

I have verified this patch#18 and its working fine.
RTBC +1

Thanks! (took the liberty of updating the status since it seems like you meant to.)

FWIW (I didn't comment on this before I created the patch because I felt like you were talking to other OOTB leaders), but to me this change makes sense. My interpretation of the source that alexpott posted was that it is logical to use a singular term if you're providing the site visitor with multiple search facets, so they might want to say "find me things that are both an appetizer and egg-based." But for our current implementation, that's not what we're doing; we're saying "here is a collection of appetizers" and therefore the plural makes more sense for our use case.

Also, if we ever were to offer a complex search, I don't think it's illogical to think of it as "find me things that fall into the category of appetizers and also contain eggs," (where egg would presumably be in a different facet containing ingredients). I'm not a professional taxonomist (nor do I play one on TV), but to this taxonomy layperson. the plural makes more sense for our current need and isn't any less logical for potential future needs.

I also think for our use case of the recipe category, pluralisation helps make more sense of the term links and titles. My vote goes with continuing the pluralisation of terms in this vocab.

I rerolled the patch manually with the help of @cosmicdreams.

Recent patch only had 2 flaws. Fixed with this.

Rerolled for 8.8.x. The patch in 29 might apply to 8.7.

Big thanks to whomever refactored the taxonomy terms out into their own csv file — that made rerolling this patch much easier!

@web-developer-1993 — Thanks for rerolling the patch! I was in a rush yesterday and didn't take the time to explain why the reroll I submitted was so different, but I thought it deserved an explanation.

When this issue was originally created, the names of the taxonomy terms were included in the recipes.csv file. So the change to plural needed to be made there, as it was in your patch. But as part of the work to make Umami translatable into other languages, recently the taxonomy terms were separated into their own recipe_category.csv file, and the recipes.csv file was changed to include the term IDs that pointed to those terms instead of using the category name. (Looks like this change happened in #3028627: Restructure Umami's default content files so more than one language can be included.) So that's why your manual reroll didn't work, because unbeknownst to you those terms were no longer present in the file. Usually a reroll on an issue like this would be more straightforward — I was initially pretty confused when I realized the categories had completely disappeared from recipes.csv!

Thanks again for contributing to this issue. I hope you had fun sprinting at DrupalCon.

@BrightBold
Thanks for the detailed explanation on this.

I have verified and tested the patch#31 related to taxonomy terms and its working fine. Moving this to RTBC.

This is great, thank you!
Thanks to this patch I was able to discover a bug in Umami 8.7 -
#3048699: Taxonomies are only displayed in English

To get this patch ready we need the same tags pluralized in Spanish as well.
English CSV file - works well!
core/profiles/demo_umami/modules/demo_umami_content/default_content/languages/en/taxonomy_term/recipe_category.csv

Spanish CSV file - needs work (the only difference in the file's path is es instead of en
core/profiles/demo_umami/modules/demo_umami_content/default_content/languages/es/taxonomy_term/recipe_category.csv

In order to test this issue you would have to apply this patch first #3048699: Taxonomies are only displayed in English (unless it's already committed to core)

Good catch, Schaal. I totally forgot about the Spanish translation.

My Spanish is meh so can someone more fluent confirm that these plurals are correct and make sense in context (per the earlier discussion that the plural of breakfast in this case would be breakfast)?

• Acompañamientos
• Postres
• Platos principales
• Tentempi‌és
• Entrantes

Deleted duplicate comment, sorry

Tagging for DrupalNorth 2019

Confirmed with Spanish speaking guys the translations and they pass. Attaching a patch including these as well.

Thank you for your review @Eli_T. I have updated the patch accordingly.

Committed and pushed 41957b6030 to 8.8.x and f10c52b708 to 8.7.x. Thanks!