Terminological mismatches: Request for feedback on designs

Like in the case of T313467: Ability to report mismatches on qualifiers, this task requires redesigning of the Mismatch Finder's results page and/or table to display new types of mismatches. In this case, said mismatches are related to terminological data: labels in all languages, aliases, potentially descriptions.

Some initial concerns to keep in mind regarding the overall initiative of collecting term mismatches:

1. Looking for textual differences between free, human-produced text might generate a lot of noise. This might be specially noticeable when it comes to descriptions. We'd need to understand the benefits and usefulness of including this type of mismatches.
2. When searching for terminological mismatches, we'll of course have to take all languages into account (and indicate this in the results)

The initial design exploration aimed at being explicit, and presented terminology mismatches in a separate table under the same item. This allowed to clearly differentiate these different kinds of mismatches from the property (and qualifir) mismatches.

Initial proposals to visualize term mismatches on the results page (see designs in Figma)

Description: The Mismatch finder generates a separate table to display mismatches in labels, aliases and descriptions. 

The term table would be displayed below the properties’ table.

This approach was tentatively abandoned in a following iteration, where it was decided to try to group all mismatch types (properties, qualifiers and terms) in a single:

Latest iteration (see designs in Figma)

This unified solution corresponds exactly to what's documented in T313467: Ability to report mismatches on qualifiers.

Option 1: A new column specifies the type of mismatch (two possible placements)	Option 2: Descriptive text provides mismatch type inside the Mismatch column
1a 1b
Description: A new column is introduced in the mismatch table to document the ‘type’ of the listed mismatches (or 'where' they are). In option 1a, the new ‘mismatch type’ column is placed to the right of the mismatch column. In option 1b, the column is placed at the beginning of the table.	Description: In this version, a subtle descriptive text indicates the type of mismatch from within the Mismatch column.

Questions regarding the latest design iteration:

1. For label mismatches: Could we link to the item’s termbox?
2. In general, as mentioned in this comment, the unified approach might be weaker in case all or the big majority of mismatches are going to be related to statement properties: using a whole new column to indicate their type will feel redundant.