W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org > October 2013

Re: Exclusivity and atomicity of local and global ITS

From: Nathan Glenn <garfieldnate@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 22:48:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CACs83piec9QHBEXQWU-F2dwt6J6jBtF3ssuv8+d+QAvm3kmEmA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Cc: "public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org" <public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org>
Thanks. For #1, I meant that the provRule element has a
provenanceRecordsRefPointer
attribute (see 8.11.2) and the tool markup exists locally, so half local
half global. Similarly with LQI, locQualityIssueType would be global and
locQualityIssueComment local (or the other way around, it doesn't matter).
As for the local standoff winning over the global rule- what does that
mean? If local standoff has person and org, and global has tool, is the
tool ignored? I understand that if local had person and org and global also
had person and org that the local would win out. I guess you could also
ask, what is the granularity of winning out? Are all of the provenance
categories (org, person, tool, etc.) considered as one when deciding what
overwrites what, or are they resolved individually?
Nathan


On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote:

> Hi Nathan,****
>
> ** **
>
> I think the scenario of your question 1 cannot exist.****
>
> You cannot have both a local reference to a stand-off annotation and a
> local LQI info. (or a global info with a global stand-off annotation)****
>
> As for a stand-off annotation and a rule: if the stand-off annotation is
> from a local rrference it wins over the global rule.****
>
> ** **
>
> For #2 I think the rule applies, but the processor generates (possibly)
> some type of error if it tries to access the pointed information.****
>
> ** **
>
> Just my 2 cents****
>
> -yves****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Nathan Glenn [mailto:garfieldnate@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 9, 2013 7:55 PM
> *To:* public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org
> *Subject:* Exclusivity and atomicity of local and global ITS****
>
> ** **
>
> Hello all,****
>
> I am wondering about of couple of possible situations in an ITS-decorated
> document that require information about the exclusivity/atomicity of global
> and local markup:****
>
> ** **
>
> 1) If a rule of the same general category as existing local markup happens
> to match an element, but the rule and the local markup give values for
> different exact categories, do they both apply? This question is only
> relevant for provenance and locQualityIssue. For example, let's say
> there's a provRule that matches element X, and references a provenanceRecords
> element that contains person and org information, and local markup on Xspecifies
> tool. Does the element then have ITS information on person, org and tool,
> or does the local specification of tool erase any provRule matches? For
> locQualityIssue, a similar question would arise when a global rule
> specified locQualityIssueType and the local markup specified a
> locQualityIssueComment. This one is specified with "in parallel to local
> inline markup", so I'm guessing that both would apply.****
>
> ** **
>
> 2) If a rule has a pointer attribute that doesn't match, does the rule
> still match? Is it supposed to depend on what parts of the rule are
> required attributes? For example say that the selector for this rule: <its:termRule
> selector="//term" term="yes"****
>
>   termInfoPointer="../def"/> matched a <term> element, but its termInfoPointer
> did not match anything. Does the rule still match?****
>
> ** **
>
> Nathan****
>
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2013 05:48:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:11:30 UTC