W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > April to June 2007

AI: Yves to rework some BP according Christian structure

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 06:55:50 -0600
To: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-ID: <007001c7a1f0$af4c61b0$1c32a8c0@BREIZH>

Hi all,

I've tried to re-structure some BP using Christian's proposal at the f2f. See BP#2 http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-i18n-bp/#DevDir and BP#5
http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-i18n-bp/#DevTransOver for example.

I've copied christian's original proposal at the bottom of this email for reference.

I recalled that during our discussion there was some concern about breaking the BP into too many sections. So I've tried to limit
that.

I agree that common/standardized wording is a good thing and we should try to have that.

But, as far as the structure, I'm strugling with 2 main aspects in the proposal:

A) I think examples should come along with the section they illustrate. For example in some cases we have example for the normal BP,
and then examples for the fallback (when the user has an existing schema) putting them both together would maybe confusing. So, I've
kept them along the text they illustrate for now.

B) I'm wondering about the <General> section and the usefulness of pointing to the ITS data category anywhere but in the reference
links. But I know it was an important point for Christian and maybe others, so maybe a paragraph within the <How To Do This?> would
be ok?


=== Yves' re-struct:

BP <NR>: <BP Title>

<BP Short Description> (blue band)

<How To Do This?>

	One or more of

	[Make the attributes its: ... available in your DTD or schema.]

	[You should provide an ITS rules document where you use ...]

	[Use the recommended attribute/element on the ...]

	[related example, if any]

	Paragraph refering to the related BP: [The abc attribute is part of the "Localization Note" data category which ...
Explanation taken from the ITS spec...] The link would be on the name of the data category.

	Then comes the part about existing schemas

	[For existing DTD and schema:]

	[If your schema provides a means to ...]

	[related example, if any]

<Why Doing This?>

	[The explanation text...]

<Reference Links>

	[The links...]


I have also tried to apply this to BP#6 http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-i18n-bp/#DevSeg which is the example used in Christian's proposal
second part.

Cheers,
-yves



=================================================================
Christian's Proposal at the f2f:

For BP related to ITS

H1 BP <NR>: <BP Title>

H2 <BP Short Description>

H2 <How To Do This?>

H3 <General>

	Use ITS [name of data category, e.g. "Localization Note" data category] 

	[explanation "The data category ..."]

	For details see [link to data cat in rec]

H3 <Specific>

	One or more of

	[Make the attributes its: ... available in your DTD or schema.]

	[You should provide an ITS rules document where you use ...]

	[Use the recommended attribute/element on the ...]

H3 <Discussion>

	If your schema provides a means to ...

	Please note that the ITS recommendation/this BP contains/links to rules files for several formats.

H3 <Example>

	[Example instance]

		Example explanation

		Example code

	One or more of

	[Example rules file]

	[Example instance with ITS markup]

H2 <Why Doing This?>

H3 <Reference Links>
===
For BP related to ITS

H1 Best Practice 6: Provide information necessary for text segmentation

H2 Indicate which elements do not break linguistic integrity

H2 <How To Do This?>

H3 <General>


	Use ITS [name of data category, e.g. "Localization Note" data category] 

Use the ITS Elements Within Text data category.

	[explanation "The data category ..."]

It reveals if and how an element affects the way text content behaves from a linguistic viewpoint.

	For details see [link to data cat in rec]

http://www.w3.org/TR/its/#elements-within-text

H3 <Specific>

	One or more of

	[Make the attributes its: ... available in your DTD or schema.]

	[You should provide an ITS rules document where you use ...]

You should provide an ITS rules document where you use the its:withinTextRule element to indicate which elements should be treated
as part of its parent, or as a nested entry.

	[Use the recommended attribute/element on the ...]

H3 <Discussion>

	If your schema provides a means to ...

	Please note that the ITS recommendation/this BP contains/links to rules files for several formats.

H3 <Example>

	[Example instance]

		Example description

The following DITA document has two elements that should be treated as "within text": term and b, and one that should be treated as
a nested independent run of text: fn.

		Example code

	One or more of

	[Example rules file]

	[Example instance with ITS markup]

H2 <Why Doing This?>

Many applications that process content for linguistic-related tasks need to be able to perform a basic segmentation of the text
content. They need to be able to do this without knowing about the semantic of the elements.

While in many cases it is possible to automatically detect mixed content, there are some occurrences where the structure of an
element makes it impossible for tools to know for sure how to treat text. For example, the li element in XHTML can contain text as
well as p elements.


H3 <Reference Links>
Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2007 12:55:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:49 GMT