: How can this technical message be made clearer? How could this technical sentenced be improved for better clarity? Cannot translate the ‘name1’ concept1 to the ‘name2’ concept2 because the

Vote Up Vote Down

Relative clauses ("which overides it") make the reader work. They have to go back and forth in the sentence trying to match up the "which"s and the "it"s.

By the sounds of it, you are doing something very abtstract and technical so the reader is working hard enough already. Don't worry about dumbing it down! Without the relative clause it might go like this :

Cannot translate the ‘Fred’ apple to the ‘John’ orange because the
‘John’ orange is blocked by the existance of the higher precedence
‘Julia’ tangerine.

Instead of "the existance of", maybe try "the presence of", or just leave it out altogether:

Cannot translate the ‘Fred’ apple to the ‘John’ orange because the
‘John’ orange is blocked by the higher precedence ‘Julia’ tangerine.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

If you want to keep the same format, I would go with:

Cannot translate 'name1' concept1 to 'name2' concept2 because an existing translation from 'name3' concept3 to 'name2' concept2 takes precedence.

Using your fruit example, it would look like this:

Cannot translate the 'Fred' apple to the 'John' orange because an existing translation from the 'Julia' tangerine to the 'John' orange takes precedence.

I have a strong feeling that this error message will cause a lot of confusion to someone who is not already familiar with your precedence rules. It might help to add more information (especially information that will help resolve the issue). For example:

Cannot translate the 'Fred' apple to the 'John' orange because an existing translation from the 'Julia' tangerine to the 'John' orange takes precedence. This error occurs when you create translations with different sources that have the same result. You should remove the lower prededence translation or re-evaluate your order of precedence.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

Cannot translate the ‘name1’ concept1 to the ‘name2’ concept2 because the higher
precedence ‘name3’ concept3 also exists, which overrides it.

If there are more ‘name3’ concept3 than ‘name1’ concept1 then ‘name1’ concept1 cannot be translated to ‘name2’ concept2 .

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

Firstly, it's always a good idea to clearly indicate whether the message reflects an actual error, or simply a warning which the user may choose to ignore.
Secondly, try to minimise use of "jargon" terms such as translate, higher precedence, and overrides.

Warning: The 'name1' concept1 is assumed to be a type of 'name3' concept3, not a 'name2' concept2.
Warning: The 'Fred' apple is assumed to be a type of 'Julia' tangerine, not a 'John' orange.

Depending on the exact context, it might be better to replace the "not..." bit at the end with something like "(did you mean a 'John' orange)".

(0)