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

Re: Input to Best Practice 18: Assign unique identifiers to text items when possible

From: Andrzej Zydron <azydron@xml-intl.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:41:33 +0100
Message-ID: <46F0E0BD.6020705@xml-intl.com>
To: public-i18n-its@w3.org
Hi Everyone,

Sorry for what might appear to be repetition of my previous post on this 
topic. Is it not possible to mention xml:tm as a viable way of achieving 
unique text identifiers. xml:tm is the only standard to date that 
references W3C ITS directly (in fact W3C ITS is mandated by xml:tm), and 
is most likely to be the main way in which the W3C ITS is actually used 
and implemented. It might be nice to reciprocate this in BP 18.

Best Regards,

AZ

Felix Sasaki wrote:
>
> Hi Yves,
>
> Yves Savourel wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm working on my AI 
>> (http://www.w3.org/International/its/track/actions/21)
>>
>> One of the change to do is:
>>
>>  
>>> We should align this formulation
>>> "Your DTD or schema should provide xml:id (or an equivalent mechanism)"
>>> with BP 9, e.g. like:
>>> "Your DTD or schema should provide xml:id (or a different attribute 
>>> to be of type ID)"
>>>     
>>
>> I would tend to disagree: why be more specific in this Author BP than 
>> the others? In BP 15, 16 and 17 are not specific about what
>> exactly means 'equivalent'.
>>   
>
> Probably the case of  BP 18 is different than BP 15, 16 or 17: in the 
> latter three BP, we assume different markup with the same 
> functionalities. In BP 18, however, the functionalities of unique 
> identifiers can be rather different (although all share the purpose of 
> unique identification). See as an example of a different functionality 
> the mention of xs:unique/xs:key by Jirka at 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2007JulSep/0075.html
>
>> The authors don't really give a vole's pattouti about what are the 
>> specifics of the equivalent mechanism (or of xml:id for that
>> matter).
>>   
> Probably the differences between its:translate vs. e.g. the "dita" 
> translate attribute (see BP 17) are not so large, compared to 
> differences between xml:id vs. xs:unique/xs:key . Hence, we thought 
> that in BP 9 and BP 18 the alignment and actual repetition of material 
> is rather helpful to the reader.
>
> Felix
>
>


-- 
email - azydron@xml-intl.com
smail - c/o Mr. A.Zydron
	PO Box 2167
        Gerrards Cross
        Bucks SL9 8XF
	United Kingdom
Mobile +(44) 7966 477 181
FAX    +(44) 1753 480 465
www - http://www.xml-intl.com

This message contains confidential information and is intended only for
the individual named.  If you are not the named addressee you may not
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.  Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
delete this e-mail from your system.
E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as
information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive
late or incomplete, or contain viruses.  The sender therefore does not
accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this
message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.  If verification
is required please request a hard-copy version. Unless explicitly stated
otherwise this message is provided for informational purposes only and
should not be construed as a solicitation or offer.



Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 08:41:45 UTC

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