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

RE: Input to BP 11 http://www.w3.org/International/its/techniques/its-techniques.html#DevTermOver

From: Yves Savourel <yves@opentag.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 09:58:48 -0600
To: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002501c7d90b$d864f0b0$0400a8c0@BREIZH>

Hi Christian,

> I guess the motivation (preferably in "Why do this") could be more 
> explicit. We may want to reuse text from BP 10 like
> "The capability of specifying terms within the source content is 
> important for terminology management that is beneficial to translation 
> and localization quality. Term identification also facilitates the 
> creation of glossaries and allows validation of terminology usage in 
> the source and target documents."

Sounds fine with me.
I guess there is no harm repeating the same paragraph if the reason is the same for both cases.

> Quote> Make also sure the its:rules element is available somewhere in 
> Quote> your documents
> We may want to reuse the wording for "its:rules" from Best Practice 8 
> (which amongst others indicates that we can have file-external rules).

So something like this?:

It is also recommended to define the its:rules element in your DTD or schema, for example in a header if there is one. The its:rules
element provides access to the its:termRule element which can be used to override terminology-related information globally.

> Quote> this will allow authors to override terminology-related
> information at the element level.
> In case the native/host vocabulary does not have a means to specifying 
> terms, "its:term" will not only serve the purpose of overriding but of 
> specifying.

How about: "this will allow authors to override or define terminology-related ..."

Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 15:59:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:09 UTC