W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-geo@w3.org > July 2005

Re: New FAQ: entities and NCRs

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 19:37:00 +0200
Message-ID: <1132397273.20050704193700@w3.org>
To: "Richard Ishida" <ishida@w3.org>
Cc: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>, "'GEO'" <public-i18n-geo@w3.org>

On Monday, July 4, 2005, 7:23:18 PM, Richard wrote:

RI> This FAQ is aimed at content authors such as those on the WSG list, not
RI> techno-geek implementors, so I am thinking to actually go the other way, and
RI> be less specific.

How is that helpful? I don't see that being less clear (indeed,
inaccurate, in the suggested text) helps anyone. If people know enough
to go looking at the source and altering it (rather than accepting
whatever their authoring tool produced) then they are going to be most
helped by using already defined terms that they can look up, rather than
newly defined, vague, and inaccurate terms.

RI> "A character entity. This is a very different animal. Character
RI> entities are defined in the markup language definition.

Not necessarily.

RI>  This means, for example,..."

RI> I only want to make the point at this juncture that they must be defined
RI> somewhere for you to be able to use them.  Note that this glosses over (at
RI> this point) whether they are defined in the internal subset or not, whether
RI> they are definable in RelaxNG or not, etc. Later we will introduce the
RI> dangers of use.

RI> RI


RI> ============
RI> Richard Ishida
RI> W3C

RI> contact info:
RI> http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/ 

RI> W3C Internationalization:
RI> http://www.w3.org/International/ 

RI> Publication blog:
RI> http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
 
 

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Chris Lilley [mailto:chris@w3.org] 
>> Sent: 04 July 2005 03:51
>> To: Felix Sasaki
>> Cc: Richard Ishida; GEO
>> Subject: Re: New FAQ: entities and NCRs
>> 
>> On Monday, July 4, 2005, 4:26:13 AM, Felix wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> FS> Hi Richard,
>> 
>> FS> Just a minor point about the FAQ:
>> 
>> FS> "A character entity. This is a very different animal. All 
>> should be 
>> FS> predefined in the markup language definition."
>> 
>> FS> Could be changed to
>> 
>> FS> "A character entity. This is a very different animal. All 
>> should be 
>> FS> predefined in the markup language definition as XML DTD entity 
>> FS> declarations"
>> 
>> FS> I'm not happy with that wording,
>> 
>> Nor I. How about:
>> 
>> "A character entity. This is a very different animal. All 
>> should be defined in document instance (internal DTD subset). 
>> Relying on the markup language definition (external DTD 
>> subset) is fragile, as fetching it is optional.."
>> 
>> FS>  but I would like to express that
>> FS> character entities rely on the XML DTD mechanism for general 
>> FS> entities, which is e.g. not available in RELAX NG.
>> 
>> The DTD mechanism is unaffected by the use of RelaxNG or W3C 
>> XML Schema validation.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>>  Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
>>  Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
>>  W3C Graphics Activity Lead
>> 




-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
Received on Monday, 4 July 2005 17:37:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:40 GMT