Rename infection states for frontend

[mknaranja]

Description

See #270

Related Issues

270

Checklist

I, the author of this PR checked the following requirements for good software quality:

• [x] The code is properly formatted (I ran the formatter)
• [x] The code is written with our software quality standards (I ran the linter)
• [x] The code is written using our code style
• [ ] Extensive in source documentation has been added
• [ ] Unit and/or integration tests have been added
• [x] All texts have been internationalized with at least the following languages:
  • [x] English
  • [x] German
• [ ] I tried addressing all new accessibility problems displayed in the console and documented if they can't be fixed
• [ ] I attached performance measurements to prevent performance degradation
• [ ] I added the changes to the next release section of the changelog

I, the reviewer checked the following things:

• [ ] I ran the software once and tried all new and related functionality to this PR
• [ ] I looked at all new and changed lines of code and commented on possible problems
• [ ] I read the added documentation and checked if it is understandable and clear
• [ ] I checked the added tests for completeness
• [ ] I checked the internationalized strings for spelling errors
• [ ] I checked the performance metrics for problems or unexplained degradation
• [ ] I checked that the changes are noted in the changelog

[github-actions[bot]]

Unit Test Results

  1 files  ±0  14 suites  ±0   33s :stopwatch: -3s 32 tests ±0  32 :heavy_check_mark: ±0  0 :zzz: ±0  0 :x: ±0  33 runs  ±0  33 :heavy_check_mark: ±0  0 :zzz: ±0  0 :x: ±0 

Results for commit 4c01ba61. ± Comparison against base commit 9055c630.

:recycle: This comment has been updated with latest results.

[NXXR]

From @mknaranja 's mail (paraphrased):

1. There's one compartment too many, wich might have been caused by an error we earlier had. Recovered and SusceptibleV2 should be the same compartment so you may not ever have data for one of the two.
2. The internal states in the model were renamed at some point and the English translation now mirrors these changes.
3. Hospitalized and ICU were renamed [to Infected Severe and Infected Critical]. Which might cause issues with the Health Authorities.
4. Should we use brackets or a separator for the status behind infected (severe, critical)
5. Add a tooltip or explanation to the Test & vaccination glyphs/emotes

@lenarothenhaeusler maybe you can give some thoughts on the translations, especially regarding point 3 mentioned above?

[lenarothenhaeusler]

@lenarothenhaeusler maybe you can give some thoughts on the translations, especially regarding point 3 mentioned above?

We would suggest to align the word type and to use subjectives only. That means: Infizierte; Hospitalisierte; Intensivpatienten; Verstorbene; Kontaktpersonen; Genesene. The word "Hospitalisiert" and "Intensivpatient" is commonly used in this or a similar way in the LHAs reporting or contact/case management software, that's why we would suggest to stay with this terminology.

[NXXR]

I reintroduced Recovered, as it is still used by the backend and removing the translation just breaks the diplay/translation.

I omitted the Infected from the compartments as it is present in pretty much all compartments and to reduce line lenght (to avoid wrapping).

I added a change to the way the labels are displayed to allow line breaks and added them to the translation to separate the infection state from the test & vaccination glyphs.

I applied @lenarothenhaeusler 's suggestions to use subjectives.

[lenarothenhaeusler]

Could you maybe also change "Verstorbene" in "Todesfälle"? Sorry for coming up with this late!

[NXXR]

From @mknaranja:

'Intensivpatienten' is not gendered. Why not use nouns and adjectives: 'Symptomatisch', 'Hospitalisiert', '(In) Intensivpflege'?

From @lenarothenhaeusler:

We suggested subjectives to create a uniform style. Using 'Infizierte', 'Hospitalisierte', 'Intensivpatienten', 'Todesfälle', 'Genesene', and 'Kontaktpersonen'; the style stays the same and we are just talking about persons.

A question regarding @mknaranja 's suggestion: Where are the asymptomatic cases represented?

I think @mknaranja 's list was non-exhaustive. The fitting term would probably be 'Nichtsymptomatisch' or 'Asymptomatisch'.

Should we use 'Nichtsymptomatisch' or 'Asymptomatisch'? Is there a difference between the term in regards of the simulation?

[lenarothenhaeusler]

In my opinion showing "symptomatisch" or "asymptomatisch" would be only supplementary to "infiziert". LHAs want to see how cases in general develop in the first place. If you make the distinction, you show two different values and lines in the diagramm that need to be joined in thought then. But i'm open for discussion here.

[NXXR]

🤔 But changing the descriptors does not change the data behind it. Keeping Infected and Carrier as "Infiziert" and "Träger" could be more misleading than renaming them into "Symptomatisch" and "Asymptomatisch".

[NXXR]

@lenarothenhaeusler & @mknaranja did you find a definitive answer or compromise for this yet?

[lenarothenhaeusler]

@annawendler that was our discussion regarding the renaming of the infection status. But probably we need to assess first which infection status we want to show (issue #316) and then we can think of the renaming?!