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

Re: [Comment on ITS WD] Existing ruby markup

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 21:09:38 +0900
Message-ID: <451BBB82.8020202@w3.org>
To: ishida@w3.org
Cc: www-i18n-comments@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org, public-i18n-its@w3.org

Hello Richard & i18n core,

Thank you very much for your comments on the ITS working draft. The ITS
Working Group discussed your comment and came up with the the following
changes, see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0402.html
and http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3466 :

- a subsection 3.5 on "Usage of Internationalized
Resource Identifiers in ITS"
- the deletion of conformance clause 2-2 for
ruby / directionality in sec. 42
-  the change of references (Ruby and
directionality are only non-normative referenced now)
- a clarification of the definitions for ruby and directionality in sec.
6.5.1 and 6.6.2.

Please let us know within 2 weeks if these changes addresses your concerns.

Thank you,

Felix



ishida@w3.org wrote:
> Comment from the i18n review of:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-its-20060518/
> 
> Comment 35
> At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0606-its/
> Editorial/substantive: E/S
> Owner: RI
> 
> Location in reviewed document:
> 6.6.2
> 
> Comment: 
> It's not abundantly clear from the text, but i think you mean to say, in the last para, that there are a set of global rules for associating markup that *conforms to Ruby-TR* with ruby concepts. Please make that clearer, and make it clearer that these global rules *do not apply* if the target markup is not identical to or a conformant subset of Ruby-TR.
> 
> 
> I'm also wondering whether XHTML 1.1 would need such global rules. If it does, it would be a good example to cite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 28 September 2006 12:10:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 October 2008 10:18:51 GMT