W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: I18n comment: Notion of type

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 11:57:07 +0900
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: www-style@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.s39w5hqux1753t@ibm-60d333fc0ec.mag.keio.ac.jp>

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:25:01 +0900, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>> >
>> > Your notion of "type": It would be good if you note that there are  
>> different
>> > notions of types, e.g. the element name as a type (as in the case of  
>> CSS) as
>> > the XML Schema notion of types.
>> It is not the draft which makes the confusion, but the fact that esp. in
>> the last years of W3C standardization various notion of types have been
>> created. Since you seem to aim this document for a wider audience, you
>> might not only technical issues into account, but also readability /
>> wider context issues.
> The working group discussed this issue.
> We do not understand where the confusion is. The term "element type" is a
> well-established term used since before 1986. While the word "type" does
> have other meanings, of course, it does not seem confusing in this
> context.
> If this does not satisfy you, please let us know more detailed reasons
> for your request.
> Cheers,

We are not satisfied with your reply. All what we require is a  
non-normative statement which says "this is not the type as in XML Schema".
Regards, Felix.
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2006 02:57:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:23:00 UTC