W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > January to March 2005

RE: ITS requirements categorization

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:43:07 -0700
To: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-ID: <HYDRAVccxXzLs1noUvl000098cb@hydra.RWS.LOCAL>

Hi all,

Here is a try of how I would categorize the different requirements we have come
up so far.
Like Masaki I've used the kept the numbers between [] for reference to the old
document. I've also added a few things.


== Localization annotations
Things that are additional information for the localizers.

[2.5] Note to localisers



== Information about the data
Things that could be used by the translation or other text-oriented tools (like
spell-checkers, etc.) when processing the documents. I guess this is also used
by the localizers, but I'm making a distinction because the informations here
are more geared toward things the tools need.

[2.17] Allowed characters

[2.18] Term identification

[2.19] Inline and subflow elements

[2.20] Word breaking
Note to have in the description for this: This is limited to inline elements.

[2.21] White space handling
(May be in "Information for rendering" too?)

[2.2+2.3] Identification of text to translate
I would merge [2.3] (Direct identification of content that should not be
translated) and [2.3] (Indirect identification of content that should not be
translated) into one requirement because it seems that the it's the same one,
but with different 

[Addition] Identification of text to word-count
(From Tim's early comments).

[Addition] Identification of text to segment
(From Tim's early comments).

[Addition (maybe?)] Location of the translation
In some documents the translation may have to go to a place different from the
source location This is not necessarily for multilingual original documents, but
also for XML formats used for translation (XLIFF is one, but I come across other
as well). It maybe a 'property' level thing only though: I can't imagine an
example where we would do this in a document instance.

[2.15] Indication of container size



== Information for rendering
Things that should be used directly by the user agents to render properly the
text.

[2.23] Markup to support international script features

[2.11] Declaring the language of the content

[2.22] Unicode characters vs. markup

[2.10] Character encoding declarations



== Best Practices
Things that are choices made by the DTD/Schema developers in the architecture of
their XML formats.

[2.6] Attributes and translatable text

[2.14] References to UI messages in documentation

[2.9] Unique identifiers

[2.13] Citations

[2.7] Emphasis & document conventions

[2.16] Infinite naming scheme (avoiding it)



== Not sure
Things that don't seem to fit in any other categories.

[2.8] Tags with linguistically-dependent scope

[2.24] Support for localisable resource data 

[2.12] Describing other cultural aspects of the content

[2.4] Provision of a SPAN-like element
It seems to be a different type of requirement: Something to do with the
different types of implementations we could have. That could be in a part we tag
set and localization properties are discussed.


Cheers,
-yves
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2005 17:43:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:44 GMT