W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org > July 2009

Re: ITS as a microformat (proposal)

From: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 22:34:03 +0200
Message-ID: <4A4D19BB.6050205@kosek.cz>
To: Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>
CC: public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org
Felix Sasaki wrote:
> Interesting approach ... esp. since validation is a kind of lax. What would
> you or others think of the following approach: define a grammar (below in
> ABNF form) to parse the ITS local data categories, e.g. like this:
> 
> ITSMF = itsprefix [translate] [terminology] [localizationNote]
> [directionality]
> itsprefix = "its"
> translate = "-translate-" ("yes" | "no")
> terminology = "-term" ["-termInfoRef:" IRI] ; IRI production from RFC 3987
> localizationNote = ...
> terminology = ...
> 
> That is, have the translate, terminology, localization note and
> directionality data categories all "packed" in a class attribute.

Seems little bit like a markup abuse, but microformats are all about
abuse, after all ;-)

But I don't think that IRIs should encoded inside class name, e.g.
content of termInfoRef. This way IRI is not exposed as some kind of link
in HTML representation and user agents can't directly act on it. But for
other categories your approach might work well.
	
				Jirka

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
  Jirka Kosek      e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz      http://xmlguru.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
       Professional XML consulting and training services
  DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
------------------------------------------------------------------
 OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member
------------------------------------------------------------------


Received on Thursday, 2 July 2009 20:34:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 2 July 2009 20:34:50 GMT