你好 @anon094061，这是一个非常有趣的问题，因为它让我们看到了不同的用户和视角。来自一个 IT 方面的“恐龙”的一点意见。通常我讨厌任何自动功能，除非它文档非常完善、透明且可配置（包括可关闭）。
灾难是那些呈现概念混合的工具，你必须完成或确认某些工作或配置（通过 OK 或 ENTER），而其他窗口或部分那里“没有”任何视觉反馈，你只能希望你的设置已保存或应用。或者也许你只是忽略了勾选符号，它不在你预期的右下角，而在右上角。听起来熟悉吗？
到目前为止，我在这一方面对 PT 非常满意，想不起来在工作中丢失过任何重要东西。我想这是良好的习惯，或者好的 PT，或者当然两者兼有。
只有一个细节：对于本地团队，我必须说，他们大多数人从未使用过或见过那些“不太像软盘的”图标。所以 PT 中的保存符号已过时，在这里没有帮助。
我在 PT 中工作了多年，甚至不知道自动保存。有一天发现了在更改章节时保存的选项。PT 总是很公平，在更改章节时提议保存，所以我们总是必须点击那些。我理解这些消息意味着“如果你更改章节且不保存，你的工作将会丢失”，所以在这种情况下我们通常希望保存。
如果 PT 中除了更改章节的魔法之外还有更多的“自动保存”，我不知道。这里的几个帖子只是写“自动保存”。这具体指的是什么功能？
否则，翻译工作——或至少某些阶段——可以通过输入多个选项来完成（当我们作为团队工作时，我们经常使用多个选项并排，用 / 符号分隔），并在书面和相邻经文的上下文中查看它们。然后想法会被喊出来，屏幕上的文本会被编辑。这可以称为“创造性地折腾直到变好”。
经文历史及其“时间标签”对我来说仍然是一个深奥的谜。所以，如果应用了某些自动保存功能，我们可能在一节经文中拥有数十或数百个版本，而不是可能十个版本，如果应用于我们的创造性测试方式：愿它永远不要发生。
所以，对于驾驶机动车或翻译经文等重要工作，我的观点仍然是，机器，即使是 AI，也永远无法知道真正发生了什么。所以用户的角色是集中注意力并在需要时明智地保存。或者使用离开且不保存的选项，如果某些草稿想法被考虑过但未被团队喜爱。
我使用一些付费的专业工具，如编辑器，有些允许我为撤销和（自动）保存目的分配特定数量的 RAM 或磁盘空间（以 GB 为单位）。这些是好功能。我个人可能对自动保存非常保守（但我喜欢那些自动保存被放入特定文件夹或文件名有特定后缀的工具，我可以自己配置）。相比之下，对于我确信它们真的能很好地处理撤销艺术的工具，我通常会给予非常宽松的撤销额度。
Hi @anon094061, very interesting question as it allow us to see what different users and perspectives exist. A little input from a dinosaur, IT-wise. Normally I hate anything automatic, unless it is very well documented, transparent and configurable (turn-offable included).
A desaster are those tools where they present a mix of concepts, where you have to complete or confirm certain work or configurations (with OK or ENTER) and other windows or parts there is “nothing” and no visual feedback and you just have to hope that your settings have been saved or applied. Or maybe you have just overlooked the tick-symbol which is not bottom-right where you expect it, but top-right. Sound familiar?
So far I am very happy with PT in this aspect and cannot remember ever having lost anything significant, workwise. Good habits, I suppose or good PT or course.
Just one detail: For the local team I have to say, that most of them have never used nor seen any of those “not-very floppy disks”. So the save-symbol in PT is outdated and not helpful here.
I was working for years in PT and never even knew about autosave. One day discovered the option to save when changing chapters. PT was always fair and proposed saving when changing chapters, so we always had to do those clicks. I understood those messages to mean “if you change chapters and do not save, your work would be lost”, so of course we mostly want to save in this case.
If there is more “autosave” in PT beyond the changing-chapters magic, I do not know. Several posts here just write “autosave”. What feature is meant by that exactly?
Otherwise translation work - or at least certain stages - can be done by entering several options (we often use several options next to each other with / symbols to separate them, when working as a team) and looking at them in writing and in context of the neighbouring verses. Then ideas will be shouted and the text on the screen is edited. This could be called “creative messing around until good”.
The verse-history and its “timing tags” is a deep mystery to me still. So instead of having maybe ten versions in a verse we might have dozens or hundreds with certain autosave features, if it were applied to our way of creative testing: may it never happen.
So my perspective for important work like driving a motor vehicle or translating scripture is still that a machine, even AI, can never know what is really happening. So it is the user’s role to concentrate and wisely save when needed. Or to use the option to go away and not save, if some draft ideas were considered and not-loved by the team.
I use some paid professional tools like editors and some let me assign a specific amount of RAM or disk space in GB for undo and for (auto)save purposes. Those are good features. I personally might be very conservative with autosave (but like it where those autosaves are put into specific folders or have specific suffixes to the file-names that I can configure myself). In contrast, I would normally give very generous allowances for undos, for those tools where I am confident that they really handle the art-of-undo well.
