[ro] feature /content/docs/concepts/glossary.md

[didiViking]

Related to #8088

[didiViking]

@chalin Hi, is this last failed error for check links related to false positives? Most of the pages are not yet translated into Romanian, they are linked as per the English version. Please advise, thank you!

[chalin]

@chalin Hi, is this last failed error for check links related to false positives? Most of the pages are not yet translated into Romanian, they are linked as per the English version. Please advise, thank you!

Hi. No, these are real failures. If you inspect the log at https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry.io/actions/runs/18516852373/job/52769038456?pr=8093, you'll see that it's complaining about missing Header IDs (hashes):

ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #metric
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #data-source
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #data-source
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #service
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #metadata
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #signal
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #resource
...

[didiViking]

@chalin Hi, I'm trying to fix the Check Links errors, but the error details point me to some other languages files. I'm blocked in this PR and I'm not sure how to fix this.
@theletterf Any advice from tech writers highly appreciated. Thank you!

[vitorvasc]

Hi, @didiViking!

I can see what is happening here, there are a few things you should do to address the issue with the links, I'll leave some inline comments.

[vitorvasc]

Feel free to reorder the headings alphabetically as well, it helps keep the glossary consistent and easier to navigate. 🙂

[didiViking]

@vitorvasc Thank you for the tips and examples. Now I fixed all missing Header IDs and it's failing due to some Portuguese broken links. Any ideas?

[vitorvasc]

@vitorvasc Thank you for the tips and examples. Now I fixed all missing Header IDs and it's failing due to some Portuguese broken links. Any ideas?

I don't see the Portuguese broken links in the history, could you share which ones you're referring to?

From what I can see in the last run, there are still three remaining errors in content/ro/docs/concepts/glossary.md:

ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #distributions
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #receptors
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #signals

[didiViking]

@vitorvasc Thank you for the tips and examples. Now I fixed all missing Header IDs and it's failing due to some Portuguese broken links. Any ideas?

I don't see the Portuguese broken links in the history, could you share which ones you're referring to?

From what I can see in the last run, there are still three remaining errors in content/ro/docs/concepts/glossary.md:

ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #distributions
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #receptors
  hash does not exist --- ro/docs/concepts/glossary/index.html --> #signals

I corrected "receptors" but both "distributions" and "signals" are in the plural form in this error but in singular form in the original Header. I tried adding both plural and singular forms and the CI/CD it's still complaining.

[didiViking]

@vitorvasc @theletterf
I'm left with "signals", in this page both "signal" and "signals" exist as hash. If I change it to plural or singular form it complaints the other form doesn't exist. If anyone has an idea how to fix this, please let me know. Thanks!

[didiViking]

@vitorvasc All checks passed, I added all original links at the bottom of the text. Could you please review? I still need to pass this through a Romanian content review. Thank you!

[vitorvasc]

Added a few inline suggestions, that should cover all the link labels now. Let me know if you have any questions 🙂

[didiViking]

@IrinaKarantoniou Thank you for your comments on slack for this PR, I add them here for visibility:
10 - 11 din cadrul proiectului
14 oferim comentarii privind ortografia și scrierea cu... ,22 schimbă despre cu referitoare la
93 - în principiu în textul în engleză se referă la faptul că collector este un substantiv atributiv, în română nu există așa ceva, se utilizează genitivul, vezi exemplul tău "Configurația colectorului", deci ar trebui să schimbăm chestia asta, 100 - scrie doar "contrib", mai trebuia să fie ceva? 203 - "pentru a evita ambiguitatea", 232 - 233 "Se pot enumera, de exemplu, instrumente open source...", 327 - nu e mai bine "sub forma unor [Atribute]" în loc de "ca [Atribute]"?

10-11 DONE
14 DONE
22 Can't find this (please provide the entire paragraph)
93- I don't get your suggestion
100- contrib is mentioned as per English version, this refers to a specific form of Collector called "contrib". Hence I didn't make the automatic, logical translation to the Romanian "contributie", as it refers to a specific collector type.
203-No. In the original sentence in English, it's written: "Log
Sometimes used to refer to a collection of Log records. Can be ambiguous since people also sometimes use Log to refer to a single Log record." So log can be ambiguous since people ...". I kept this meaning in Romanian, hence: Poate fi ambiguu ...
232-233- DONE
327 DONE

[IrinaKarantoniou]

@didiViking
22 - "despre măsurătorile care au avut loc într-un interval de timp", what do you think about "referitoare la măsurătorile"?
93 - Colector ca adjectiv — de exemplu, „Configurația colectorului”. Is this an explanation for when we use the word "colector" as an adjective? If so, in Romanian, the word "colectorului" is not an adjective but it is a noun in the genitive case.

[IrinaKarantoniou]

LGTM

[didiViking]

@vitorvasc All Romanian corrections have been applied, good to send to merge queue. Thank you!

[chalin]

LGTM. Will let @vitorvasc have a final say, as well as @open-telemetry/docs-ro-approvers.