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

Reply to EMMA about ITS comments

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:50:01 +0900
Message-ID: <46E78C19.1070902@w3.org>
To: public-i18n-its@w3.org

Hi all,

I looked at the proposed response from the EMMA folks at [1]. Here are 
some thoughts.

Their reply to "ITS-1: Allowing ITS markup in EMMA markup.". They state 
that there is no language associated with the contents of emma:tokens. 
Only in some cases the content of emma:tokens are understandable to a 
"human reader". In this and all other cases, understanding by humans is 
not part of the processing of this information. So from my 
understanding, there is no value in allowing ITS markup in EMMA markup. 
There is, however, a value for ITS markup (embedded or as external 
rules) which applies to the application specific markup, which is used 
within EMMA, but not part of the EMMA namespace. See below.

Their reply to "ITS-2: Creating an ITS Rule file".: They say "NO 
RESPONSE NECESSARY", but I think we should ask them to create an 
appendix in the EMMA spec, describing the two examples on the bottom of 
[1]. The appendix could be called "Internationalization and Localization 
of application specific markup in EMMA".
A note on their mentioning of processing instructions: We should warn 
them and point them to sec. "5.4 Precedence between Selections" of [2]:
"ITS doesn't define precedence related to rules defined or linked based 
on non-ITS mechanisms (such as processing instructions for linking rules)."

Felix

[1] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2007Aug/att-0005/EMMA_and_ITS.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/its/
Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2007 06:50:12 UTC

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