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

RE: Input to BP 9 http://www.w3.org/International/its/techniques/its-techniques.html#DevUniqueID

From: Yves Savourel <yves@opentag.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 16:08:39 -0600
To: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001901c7d93f$83074fd0$2e32a8c0@BREIZH>

Hi Christian,

> 1.
> Quote>Provide a way to assign a unique identifier to translatable text.
>
> Should we really have the restriction "to translatable text"? I guess 
> that for example having identifiers for XML elements which are related 
> to graphics (eg. "img") would be beneficial from an i18n point of 
> view as well

Good point. How about:

"Provide a way to assign a unique identifier to localizable elements."



> 2. 
> Quote> Make sure the attribute xml:id, or an equivalent attribute, is
> available, at least, the "paragraph" level, for the elements that 
> contain translatable text.
> I guess we need to clarify what the features of an "equivalent attribute"
> are. Would we simply point to
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-xml-id-20050909/#validation-technologies?

I guess we should probably check what is the W3C recommendation for IDs. Is it to use xml:id?


> Why the restriction "at least paragraph" level?

Anything higher would be not very useful for translation.
But this is probably not worded well.


> Fromy my point of view, "reuse" is only one of several motivators. 
> Another motivator is for example the possibility to trace a text to 
> its use (for example in a UI).
> Wouldn't "update" or "iteration" be clearer than "update version"?
> I guess we need to clarify what the features of a "persistent identifier"
> are.

Good points. I'm also not sure what the "deliverable" is (this text is coming from the BP req).


-ys
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 22:08:50 UTC

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