Re: Possible wording for acknowledged but yet uncovered requirement related to non-textual content

I like this. Christians text sounds like a requirement, which fits good
into the requirements document. Sebastians text is a clarification about
what we can't achieve in the moment, which fits in the tagset document.

There is only one drawback about the example:

<p xmlns:its="http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its">As you can see in
    <img src="instructions.jpg" its:translate="yes"/>,
    the truth is not always out there.</p>

The default selection says that local its:translate attributes talk
about "Textual content of element, including content of child elements,
but excluding attributes", see
http://www.w3.org/TR/its/#selection-defaults-etc
So the its:translate attribute in the example doesn't attach ITS
translatability information to the @src attribute.

An solution would be a global rule:

<its:rules><its:translateRule translate="yes"
selector="//p/img/@src"/></its:rules> ...
<p xmlns:its="http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its">As you can see in
    <img src="instructions.jpg" its:translate="yes"/>,
    the truth is not always out there.</p>

Everybody fine with that? If nobody disagrees, I would change the example.

- Felix

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> I propose this as a placeholder:
> 
> <p>The selection of the ITS data categories applies to text nodes. In
> some cases these nodes form pointers to other resources; a well-known
> example is the <att>src</att> attribute on the <gi>img</gi> element in
> HTML. The ITS translate and localize data categories apply to the
> text of the pointer itself, not the object to which it points. Thus in
> this example:
>   <egXML xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples">
>     <p xmlns:its="http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its">As you can see in
>     <img src="instructions.jpg" its:translate="yes"/>,
>     the truth is not always out there.</p>
>   </egXML>
> the translation information applies to the filename
> "instructions.jpg", and is not an instruction to open the
> graphic and change the words therein.</p>
> 

Received on Thursday, 27 April 2006 01:05:43 UTC