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

RE: Proposed text for ITS spec introductory material

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:11:28 +0100
To: "'Lieske, Christian'" <christian.lieske@sap.com>, <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01e701c65343$0e5c1db0$6501a8c0@w3cishida>

Hi Christian,

I think what you suggest will probably work.


Richard Ishida
Internationalization Lead
W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lieske, Christian [mailto:christian.lieske@sap.com] 
> Sent: 24 March 2006 16:23
> To: Richard Ishida; public-i18n-its@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Proposed text for ITS spec introductory material
> Hi Richard,
> We discussed this during today's editor's call. There was 
> consensus that the spec. would benefit from the additional 
> explanations you are suggesting. We have come up with the 
> following ideas of how to accomodate your suggestions:
> A. We will intergrate the additional paragraph you are 
> suggesting for section 1.
> B. We will take your proposed sections 2.1 and 2.2 and place 
> it at the beginning of our "Introduction".
>    This would give us an new outline for the introduction 
> along the following lines
> 	1 Introduction
> 		1.1 Users and Usages of ITS
> 		1.2 Motivation for ITS
> 		1.3 Out of Scope
> 		1.4 Important Design Principles
> 		1.5 Development of this Specification
> C. We will take your proposed sections 2.3 - 2.7 and add it 
> to our "Basic Concepts".
> Of course, I will not be possible to take over your material "as is"
> since for example recent disussions in the group have 
> outdated some of it (like the bit about "schemaRule").
> It would be great if you could let us know if this proposal 
> looks alright to you. I could then start working on the 
> actual integration.
> Best regards,
> Christian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-i18n-its-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-i18n-its-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Richard Ishida
> Sent: Freitag, 24. Februar 2006 19:37
> To: public-i18n-its@w3.org
> Subject: Proposed text for ITS spec introductory material
> Chaps,
> I began reading the latest version of the ITS spec in 
> preparation for next week.  I have scribbled a number of 
> editorial comments on my paper copy, but I felt like a couple 
> of the introductory sections needed more than that.  I also 
> figured that it would be almost as easy for me to write 
> alternative text as to clarify what I'm thinking so that 
> someone else could evaluate and/or implement it.  So I wrote 
> what follows.  It is only a first pass, so there may be 
> things that can be improved.
> Section 1.1 still talks only about localization and still 
> ignores international use of schemas.  I propose the 
> following replacement text for the first two paragraphs:
> [[
> Content or software that is authored in one language (i.e. source
> language) is often made available in additional languages. 
> This is done through a process called localization, where the 
> original material is translated and adapted to the target audience.
> In addition, document formats expressed by schemas may be 
> used by people in different parts of the world, and these 
> people may need special markup to support the local language 
> or script.  For example, people authoring in languages such 
> as Arabic, Hebrew, Persian or Urdu need special markup to 
> demarcate directionality in mixed direction text.
> >From the viewpoints of feasibility, cost, and efficiency, it is
> important that the original material should be suitable for 
> localization and international use. This is achieved by 
> appropriate design and development, and the corresponding 
> process is referred to as internationalization. For a 
> detailed explanation of the terms "localization" and 
> "internationalization", see [l10n i18n].
> ]]
> Section 2, Basic Concepts, still hits me as a description of 
> ITS from the engineer's point of view, rather than describing 
> the how it intersects with the potential user's interests.  
> (It's like having documentation for Powerpoint that just went 
> through the pull-down menus in order, rather than having 
> sections such as 'How to create a new presentation', 'How to 
> work with the master', etc.)  After reading this section I 
> find I still have to work hard at reassembling the 
> information in my brain in terms of what I knew when I 
> started and where I am now, and in terms of where we're going 
> with this.
> Here is a proposal for an alternative approach.
> [[
> 2 Basic Concepts
> 2.1 Potential users of ITS
> The ITS specification aims to provide schema developers with 
> information about what markup should be supported to enable 
> worldwide use of their schemas and effective localization of 
> the content developed using that schema. This information is 
> provided in an abstract way in the data category 
> descriptions, but specific proposals for implementation are 
> also made in the specification.
> One group of people who will use this information will be 
> developing new schemas from the ground up.  In the 
> specification they will find proposals for attribute and 
> element names to be included in their new schema.  Using the 
> same names as proposed here may be helpful because it leads 
> to easier recognition of the concepts represented by both 
> authors and localization tool developers.  It is perfectly 
> possible, however, for the schema developer to develop their 
> own set of tag and element names.  The specification sets 
> out, first and foremost, to ensure the required markup is 
> available, and that the behaviour of that markup meets 
> established needs.
> Another group of users of this specification will be working 
> with existing schemas, such as DocBook, DITA, or perhaps an 
> in-house schema.
> The ITS Working Group has sought input from people developing 
> widely used formats such as DocBook and DITA, and 
> specification provides examples of how we feel those specific 
> formats could be adapted to support ITS.
> Developers working on existing schemas should check whether 
> their schemas support the markup proposed in this 
> specification, and, where appropriate, add the markup 
> proposed here to their schema. 
> In some cases, the schema may already contain markup 
> equivalent to that recommended in ITS.  In this case it is 
> not necessary to add duplicate markup. The developer should, 
> however, check that the behaviour associated with the markup 
> in their own schema is fully compatible with the expectations 
> described in this specification.
> Other users of the ITS specification will be translation tool 
> developers.  When content is sent for translation, it is 
> important to ensure that such tools recognize what to do with 
> the various bits of content described by the markup. For 
> example, translation tools should prevent content marked up 
> as not for translation from being changed.  It is hoped that 
> the ITS specification will make the job of these developers 
> easier by standardising the expected behaviour of certain 
> relevant markup items, and allowing them to more effectively 
> identify how content should be handled.
> The markup proposed in this specification may also be used by 
> content authors to mark up specific bits of content.  
> However, we will describe below how the burden of inserting 
> markup can sometimes be removed from content authors and the 
> data categories can be related to relevant bits of content in 
> a more global manner.  This work may fall to information 
> architects, rather than the content authors themselves.
> 2.2 Ways to implement ITS
> The ITS specification provides a set of element and attribute 
> names that can be included in a schema, but it also goes 
> beyond that to specify a mechanism for describing various 
> aspects of a schema in terms of translatability and 
> internationalization.
> We will explore the possible approaches below. For the 
> purpose of illustration, we will use examples of ways to 
> indicate that certain parts of content should or should not 
> be translated.  There are three ways of indicating this information:
> 1. a content author uses an attribute on a particular element 
> in the content to say that the text should not be translated
> 2. a document developer uses markup at the top of the 
> document to identify a particular type of element or context 
> in which the content should not be translated
> 3. a schema developer uses constructs in the schema itself to 
> indicate that specific parts of the content should not be translated.
> The first two approaches above can be likened to the use of 
> CSS in XHTML.  Using a style attribute, an XHTML content 
> author may assign a colour to a particular paragraph. That 
> author could also have used the style element at the top of 
> the page to say that all paragraphs of a particular class or 
> in a particular context would be coloured red.
> 2.3 Using local markup
> Example 4 shows how a content author may use an ITS attribute 
> to indicate what text should be translated and what text 
> should be protected from translation.  Translation tools that 
> are aware of the meaning of this attribute can then screen 
> the relevant content from the translation process.
> Example 4 goes here [Note the relevant parts of these 
> examples should be bolded for easy identification using a tag 
> such as strong for WAI accessibility]
> For this to work, the schema developer will need to add the 
> its:translate attribute to the schema as a common attribute 
> or on all the relevant element definitions.  
> Note how there is an expectation in this case that 
> inheritance play a part in identifying which content is to be 
> translated and which not.
> Tools that process this content for translation will need to 
> manage the scoping.
> 2.4 Using documentRule directives
> Example 5 shows a different approach to identifying 
> non-translatable content, similar to that used with a style 
> element in XHTML, but using an ITS-defined element called 
> its:documentRules.
> Example 5 goes here
> The head of a document can contain an its:documentRules 
> element, which contains one or more documentRule elements. In 
> addition to one or more ITS data category attributes, the 
> documentRule element contains a corresponding set of ITS 
> selector attributes (in the example translateSelector). As 
> their name suggests, they select (or designate) the XML node 
> or nodes to which a corresponding ITS data category attribute 
> pertains. The values of ITS selector attributes are XPath 
> absolute location paths. Information for the handling of 
> namespaces in these path expressions is contained in the ITS 
> element ns which is a child of documentRules.
> This approach has the following benefits:
> -      Content authors do not have to concern themselves with creating
> additional markup or verifying that the markup was applied correctly.
> ITS data categories are associated with sets of XML nodes 
> (for example all p elements in an XML instance)
> -	Changing the rules can be done in a single location, rather than
> by searching and modifying the markup throughout a document 
> (or documents, if the documentRules element is stored as an 
> external entity)
> -	ITS data categories can designate attribute values as well as
> elements.
> -	It is possible to map ITS markup to existing markup (for example
> the term element in DITA)  [Ed. not a clear example unless we 
> show the ITS equivalent - and I think there is none, so what 
> about citing the DITA translate attribute?]
> For this to work, the schema developer needs to add the 
> documentRules and associated markup to the schema.  In some 
> cases this may allow the schema developer to avoid adding 
> other ITS markup (such as an its:translate attribute) to the 
> elements in the schema, however, it is likely that authors 
> will want to use attributes on markup from time to time to 
> override the general rule.
> For specification of the translate flag, the contents of the 
> documentRules element would normally be designed by an 
> information architect familiar with the document format and 
> familiar with, or working with someone familiar with, the 
> needs of the localization group.
> 2.5 Using schemaRule
> Example 6 shows an alternative approach to designating the 
> XML node or nodes to which a corresponding ITS data category 
> attribute pertains.
> This time putting the information directly into the schema 
> itself, using its:schemaRule.  Note that this is only 
> possible for schemas developed using W3C XML Schema ...
> Example 6 goes here
> This example defines all term elements to be non-translatable 
> by default.
> [More text about how this works and who would do it]
> 2.6 Overwriting/precedence and inheritance
> The power of ITS selector attributes comes at a price: rules 
> related to overwriting/precedence, and inheritance, have to 
> be established.
> Example 7 goes here
> In this example, the ITS data category attribute  translate  appears
> twice: in a  documentRule , and on a specific p element. 
> Since the ITS selector attribute in the  documentRule  
> selects all p elements, the question arises what the value 
> for the translate data category of the p element which has 
> local markup is. ITS provides precedence and inheritance 
> rules which answer questions like this. In the example, the 
> value is "no" (that is the content of the p element should 
> not be translated).
> 2.7 Using ITS elements
> The above example of a translate flag applied an ITS data 
> category to an attribute node.  Many of the ITS data 
> categories can be expressed using attribute nodes, but not 
> all.  Some are expressed using element nodes.
> Here is an example of such an approach.
> ....
> ]]
> Hope that helps, and that I have understood the mechanism correctly.
> RI
> ============
> Richard Ishida
> Internationalization Lead
> W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
> http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
> http://www.w3.org/International/
> http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/
Received on Wednesday, 29 March 2006 15:11:35 UTC

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