W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > April to June 2006

Re: Action Item: http://www.w3.org/2006/04/19-i18nits-minutes.html#action01 (handling of inclusions)

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 21:28:00 +0900
Message-ID: <444E15D0.4080604@w3.org>
To: Yves Savourel <yves@opentag.com>
Cc: "'Lieske, Christian'" <christian.lieske@sap.com>, public-i18n-its@w3.org
Hi Yves, all,

Yves Savourel wrote:
> Hi Felix, all,
>  
>> It seems that it was clear to Sebastian, only unclear to Yves 
>> and me, so how about adding just one sentence to your proposal:
>>
>> <note>
>> The XPath expressions used by ITS selection assume that any inclusions 
>> (such as those based on XInclude) are resolved before selection is 
>> applied. Accordingly, inclusion mechanisms such as XInclude or DITA's 
>> <gi>conref</gi> may need to be followed before ITS selections are 
>> applied. </note>
>>
>> that is:
>> [[However, to avoid interoperability problems, the interpretation of 
>> XPath expressions within the ITS selections MUST NOT require that 
>> inclusion mechanisms are  processed.]]
> 
> But wouldn't this addition contradict the first sentence? If we assume inclusions are resolved it means we've probably processed
> them.

the sentence contains "may need to be followed", which maybe causes the
ambiguity. How about this, as a proposal for the whole paragraph:

XPath expressions used by ITS selection do not rely on any inclusion
mechanisms like XInclude or DITA's <att>conref</att> attribute. To avoid
interoperability problems, the interpretation of XPath expressions
within the ITS selections MUST NOT require that inclusion mechanisms are
 processed.

- Felix


Received on Tuesday, 25 April 2006 12:28:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:07 UTC