Feedback about requirements document

Hi Yves, all,

Here are some comments on the requirements document. I know the
"comment" deadline was Friday, but I hope that this is not too late.

- "W3C Working Draft 16 May 2006" needs to be "W3C Working Draft 18 May 2006

- "this version" needs to be http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-itsreq-20060518

- "For example, the author selects a portion of text not to translate
and clicks a button to mark it up as "do not translate with a standard
tag": How about "with standardized markup"? Since the translate
attribute is no tag.

- "Since the contents of these escaped sections cannot be marked up
using the XML ITS": Something is wrong here (what is "XML ITS"?)

- "3.8 Purpose Specification/Mapping": You might add a note about the
difference between "associating markup" versus "mapping", since we have
a solution for the former.

- general: we need to update the name of the techniques doc in the
references, as soon as it is stable, see
http://www.w3.org/International/its/requirements/Overview.html#itstech

- "W3C Note and Unicode Technical Report Unicode in XML & Other Markup
Languages": Could you add a reference to the note, also to the two
documents mentioned in the following subsection (3.11.2 Notes)?

- "Markup is also required to disable the effects of the bidirectional
algorithm for a specified range of text.": I think that is not the case,
since you could insert control characters to identify the beginning and
end of range. You could replace "required" by "applicable"?

- Paragraph starting "An additional challenge comes when one needs to
attach the information to the data associated to the element or
attribute nodes rather than the text of the nodes.": Could you add an ID
to that paragraph? Since we need to list in the tag set document that
this requirement is not fulfilled yet.

- "Obviously, some XML documents are designed for multilingual
functions, and can be used as it without problem. For example, formats
such as XLIFF or TMX.": The second sentence should be finished somehow.

- References: the document should only have non-normative references, in
alphabetic order (using the short cuts as the key).

- 3.26: Do you want to keep this separate, or do you want to have "only"
the remark in the section on translatability?

3.13, 3.18, 3.21, 3.23: Do we need to keep this? I'm not sure, since
they are only placeholder without explanatory text ...

"Acknowledgements (Non-Normative)": You might want to update the list.

Cheers,

Felix