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

RE: Feedback about requirements document

From: Yves Savourel <yves@opentag.com>
Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 07:51:24 +0200
To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>
Cc: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-ID: <005c01c66dac$73161f70$640fa8c0@Breizh>

Hi Felix, all,

Thanks for the comments.
An updated document is available:
http://www.w3.org/International/its/requirements/Overview.html
There are a few changes I still have to do.


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

Done.


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

Done.


> - "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.

Done.


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

Fixed.


> - "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.

I would not change this at this time. Our current selection/association mechanism is a form of mapping as described in this section.
I'd rather spend time fixing things in the specification or the techniques rather than the requirements.


> - 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

Date fixed. Title pending.


> - "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)?

TODO


> - "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"?

Done.


> - 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.

N/A: The paragraph is removed: Point to R026 instead.


> - "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.

Done.


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

Done.


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

We'll keep this R026: it's more generic. No reason translatability should be a special case.


> 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 ...

Mmmm... They may be useful as reminders that we did have them in our list.


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

TODO


Cheers,
-yves
Received on Tuesday, 2 May 2006 05:51:34 UTC

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