Forbidden words and language support

[sangwinc]

Form the Zuplip chat:

If your language setting is not English than preventing the English word for the Boolean does not forbid it but only it's representation in the other language.

Reproduce:
1.) Write in forbidden words: true
2.) Set language to another one than English (tested with German)
3.) Preview the question and type in true -> it will be allowed. The translated term is shown in LaTeX.
4.) Type in the translated term -> it will be forbidden (although this word itself actually wasn't)

It is of course reasonable and good that the translate representation is also prohibited, but as the English true still will be interpreted as the Boolean, you actually don't forbid it.

Is this a bug?

[aharjula]

Yes, it's a bug. Never should we assume that we are working with a single language material. If we were making that assumption, then it might be sensible to forbid other languages without forbidding the active ones. But in my view, we forbid logical concepts, not the actual words, although here true should not forbid not false. If someone needs to forbid particular languages, they may try to do that with bespoke validation.

One problem here is that, unlike with the other alias forbidden ones, where we actually know from within the security-map all the aliases and the forbidding happens through that, with the localised ones, we do not have a clear mapping, as the translation comes from the language-files, and for the boolean literals, they do not even appear in the map.

So we need some way to identify that a forbidden word might have translations in addition to aliases, and then add those translations into the forbidden set. Maybe add a flag to the security map to signal those special keywords that have translations and trigger a search for them.