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

Re: Issue of locInfoType - To keep or not

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:24:16 +0900
Message-ID: <44190490.4090200@w3.org>
To: Yves Savourel <yves@opentag.com>
Cc: public-i18n-its@w3.org
Hi Yves,

+1 for removing the attribute.

- Felix

Yves Savourel wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> There is an item listed in the Mandelieu proposals that I'd like to
> dispose of at the next teleconference. It's not a crucial one but it
> affect the markup itself, so we need to address it.
> 
> We have currently an optional attribute locInfoType with the values
> "alert|description" (and no default set for now).
> 
> The question is shall we keep it or not?
> 
> Advantages to keep it:
> 
> - Allows to make a distinction between different types of loc info.
> 
> Drawbacks:
> 
> - make things a bit more verbose, and add more things to do at the
> implementation.
> - we would need to decide where it fits in the conformance (any specific
> processing expectation)
> - if we keep it we need to have a default value for it (alert or
> description?)
> 
> My comments:
> 
> Overall I don't see much benefits into having it. From an implementation
> viewpoint (at least from my prospective) this will translate into a note
> that will have a 'ALERT' word in front of the note, or nothing. That's it.
> 
> If we keep it I think the default value should be 'description'.
> 
> I would be for removing @locInfoType simply because it doesn't seem to
> bring much and that would make ITS a tad lighter. But it's not at all a
> strong opinion and I'll go with the pack on this one.
> 
> Cheers,
> -yves
> 
> 



Received on Thursday, 16 March 2006 06:24:29 UTC

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