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

Re: ITS tagset draft: Section by Christian

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 00:29:45 +0900
Message-ID: <43F0A5E9.1090404@w3.org>
To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
Cc: public-i18n-its@w3.org
Hi Yves,

I will start implementing your comments tomorrow.

- Felix

Yves Savourel wrote:
> Some comments on Section 3.
> 
> 1--- In the paragraph "The power of ITS selector attributes comes at a price: rules related to overwriting/precedence, and
> inheritance have to be established."
> I would think "...related to overriding, precedence, and inheritance..." would be better. (overriding rather than overwriting and a
> comma). And I see the same "overwrite" vs "override" in example 8.
> Real English speakers please correct me if I'm wrong for 'overriding': I think this
> (http://simplesamples.info/Miscellaneous/Overwriting.php0 explains it a bit, but I'm not 100% sure which one is correct in this
> context.
> 
> 2--- Shouldn't all the attribute and elements reference use an XMLSpec specific markup that translates into a different font? (like
> in section 1.3 paragraph 2).
> 
> 3--- Under example 7: "The examples show that ITS data category attributes in some cases appear in elements defined by ITS itself:
> "documentRule" (embedded within a "documentRules" element, "schemaRule". It should "
> The parenthesis is not closed and the sentence ending with "schemaRule" looks truncated.
> 
> 4--- Paragraph after the second set of bullets under Example 7: "in addition one or more ITS " should be (I think) "in addition to
> one or more ITS..."
> 
> 5--- Paragraph above the bullets above Example 8: "ITS selector attributes are very powerful. They allow:" I think we should just
> say "ITS selector attributes allow:". The "are very powerful" seems arbitrary: it's a matter of opinion that we probably should
> avoid in a specification :)
> 
> 6--- In example 6: "<dita:title>Some little topic</dita:title>". The text should probably be changed to something more meangingful.
> 
> 
> That's all for that section.
> (which is a good one I thought)
> -yves
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-i18n-its-request@w3.org [mailto:public-i18n-its-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Felix Sasaki
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 7:45 AM
> To: public-i18n-its@w3.org
> Subject: ITS tagset draft: Section by Christian
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I integrated the new version of section 3.1. from Christian into the working draft. I think it gives a very good 0therview of ITS in
> general, so I thought of putting it into a separate main section. (I have not asked Christian about this position change though,
> Christian, all, what do you think?). Please have a look at
> http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#sel-intro-expr
> and comment.
> 
> Regards, Felix.
> 
> 



Received on Monday, 13 February 2006 15:29:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:06 UTC