Re: More edits done

Richard Ishida wrote:
> Yves, 
>
> I think we should discuss these points on the phone.  During a telecon or
> individually, I don't mind.
>   

how about a discussion on the telecon?

Cheers,

Felix

> Cheers,
> RI
>
> ============
> Richard Ishida
> Internationalization Lead
> W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
>  
> http://www.w3.org/International/
> http://rishida.net/blog/
> http://rishida.net/
>
>  
>  
>
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-i18n-its-request@w3.org 
>> [mailto:public-i18n-its-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Yves Savourel
>> Sent: 01 November 2007 19:42
>> To: public-i18n-its@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: More edits done
>>
>>
>> Hi Richard, all,
>>
>> Some notes on you latest edits:
>>
>>
>> -- BP 8
>>
>> a) Using elements for notes
>>
>> It seems a lot of the change has to do with encouraging the 
>> usage of elements for loc notes.
>> Which is fine, but --I think-- only if the element is part of 
>> the host namespace and "in-situ" and *does not get in the 
>> way* of the translatable text.
>>
>> Encouraging to store notes in locNoteRule elements is, I 
>> think, not something I would recommend often. It breaks the 
>> relation between comments and commented content, since they 
>> would probably be very separated. It assumes the document 
>> will be somehow processed with ITS and the comments will be 
>> presented along with the commented part. But that is far from 
>> being the majority of the cases. Having the notes right along 
>> the commented parts is better, by far.
>>
>> I think the drawback of not being able to use <span> in 
>> comments is not as bad as separating comments from commented content.
>>
>>
>> b) Example 10 and 11
>>
>> The examples 10 and 11 you have added are examples are not 
>> illustration of "How to implement this as a new feature", 
>> they show how to use the feature. So seems they should be in 
>> BP 21 in section 3 
>> <http://www.w3.org/International/its/techniques/its-techniques
>>     
> .html#AuthLocNote>?
>   
>> You will note that all the other examples (in ITS-related 
>> BPs) in section 2 have to do with how to associate existing 
>> markup with ITS data categories. We have not provided 
>> examples on how users would use the markup in section 2, but 
>> in section 3.
>>
>> If you think an example is necessary, maybe something like 
>> "For example of use "
>>
>>
>> c) locNotePointer
>>
>> The changed paragraph: "The its:locNoteRule element also 
>> allows you to specify notes in an a separate XML document via 
>> the locNotePointer attribute, ..."
>>
>> I think 'separate' is wanted here. locNotePointer takes a 
>> relative XPath expression as argument, and (maybe I'm wrong 
>> and if so, please correct me) there are no way in XPath 1.0 
>> to point outside the current document. XSLT has a document() 
>> function, but that's XSLT.
>>
>> So the original text: "The its:locNoteRule element also 
>> allows you to specify existing notes in an a XML document via 
>> the locNotePointer attribute, or to provide an existing 
>> reference to notes via the locNoteRefPointer attribute." 
>> seemed to be more correct, albeit maybe not very clear or elegant.
>>
>>
>>
>> -- BP 9
>>
>> The new text of the note: "Note: The benefits outlined below 
>> are dependent on identifiers being globally unique (i.e. 
>> unique across any documents) and persistent (i.e. ones which 
>> do not change over time)." is not quite true: all the items 
>> listed in the Why do this can be done without *globally 
>> unique* identifier, they just have to be unique within each document.
>>
>> The 'Why do this' applies to the hole BP, not just when using 
>> globally unique and persistent ID.
>>
>> Maybe "Using identifiers that are globally unique (i.e. 
>> unique across any documents) and persistent (i.e. ones which 
>> do not change over time) often provides additional benefits." 
>> was too vague.
>>
>> How about: "Unique identifiers are most useful when their 
>> values are globally unique (i.e. unique across any documents) 
>> and persistent (i.e. ones which do not change over time)."
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -yves
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>   

Received on Friday, 16 November 2007 00:53:29 UTC