W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-ws@w3.org > December 2003

RE: Overview comments

From: Addison Phillips [wM] <aphillips@webmethods.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 08:21:32 -0500
To: "Tex Texin" <tex@i18nguy.com>, "W3C I18n WS" <public-i18n-ws@w3.org>
Message-ID: <PNEHIBAMBMLHDMJDDFLHGEEAHFAA.aphillips@webmethods.com>

Hi Tex,

Thanks for the comments. Some comments below. I'll post the new draft when I
get into the office in a bit.

Addison
>
> http://www.w3.org/International/ws/ws-i18n-requirements-edit/Overview.html
>
> Here are some comments on the overview doc. Sorry about the length, most
> are minor editorial notes. However, if you don't have time to read all,
> pls look at the section on the Requirements, as that may require
> significant rewording.
>
> 1) The document margins are fixed width. Suggest making them a
> percentage of the window width, so if the window is made thinner, the
> margins are reduced and more of the window contains text (user needs to
> scroll the window left/right less).

This isn't under my control: it's the stylesheet. The original document is
the XML flavored thing.

>
> 2) Title- suggest making it less ambiguous:
> Requirements for Internationalization of Web Services

Good idea.
>
> 3) Editors- suggest adding company names to reward our sponsors...

I agree. Will do.
>
> 4) Intro
> should IRI be mentioned with URI?

Absolutely, although the definition is cribbed (quoted verbatim from the WSA
document). That doesn't mean that we shouldn't add our own tilt to it
though.
>
> 5) Intro second para
> This para raised a few questions for me:
>
> "In the course of creating the [Web Service I18N Usage Scenarios], the
> W3C Internationalization Working Group has discovered that, in order for
> there to be complete interoperability, internationalization options must
> be exposed in a consistent way in the messages exchanged between systems
> using Web services and that Web service descriptions may need to
> describe capabilities or limitations to potential users."
>
> a) should we say the WS task force or leave it as i18n WG?

The full name is a bit chewy, which is why I didn't use it originally in
what is already an overly long sentence. I'll break the sentence up and add
WSTF to the name.
>
> b) minor editorial nit but we didn't discover the requirements as much
> as demonstrated or shown...

Agreed.
>
> c) The key points should be brought out as bullets for emphasis and ease
> of identification/reference.
>
> I propose:
> The W3C Internationalization Working Group demonstrated with
> several scenarios [Web Service I18N Usage Scenarios] that
> to achieve complete interoperability in Web Services,
> internationalization must be considered and addressed.
> In particular, to have world wide usability and utilization, web
> services must:
>
> 1) expose language and culture-dependent options in the message
> exchanges  between systems using Web services, and
>
> 2) describe internationalization capabilities and limitations to
> potential users in Web service descriptions.
>
> (I could see expanding with more bullets but than the intro becomes the
> requirements list...)

I took your suggestions as a baseline and wordsmithed slightly. Check out
the new version when I get it posted later today.
>
>
> 6) Requirements
> These do not strike me as requirements statements, which I expect to be
> a problem statement for subsequent development documents to resolve.
> These strike me as feature descriptions or solutions. Should these be
> reworded to identify the requirement that needs to be satisfied?

That's the right way to do it, although I followed the pattern of the XML
and SOAP requirements documents (which just made bald faced statements).
>
> For example, bullet #2 says:
> A WSDL feature that describes the SOAP Feature in R001.
>
> It is very hard for anyone to look at this and understand what we mean
> by it,
> and it is not a requirement statement. It is a solution to a
> requirement.
> (In fact, we need to define the "R001" syntax. I assume we mean the
> first requirement. The doc needs to say so.)

I'll add some text here.
>
> I don't have time tonite to propose a rewording for all of these. Not
> sure if I can do it by Friday either...
>
> 7) References
> links need fixing. Where the document makes use of a reference, a link
> to the reference item should be made. Currently there are none.

Done.
>
> 8) Acknowledgements
> First para last word- change to "creation".

Ick. Done.
>
> For the size of the doc, the acknowledgements is a bit lengthy. I would
> eliminate the last sentence and if anyone deserves such acknowledgement
> add them as an editor.

Done.
>
> hth
> tex
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Tex Texin   cell: +1 781 789 1898   mailto:Tex@XenCraft.com
> Xen Master                          http://www.i18nGuy.com
>
> XenCraft		            http://www.XenCraft.com
> Making e-Business Work Around the World
> -------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2003 08:24:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:38 UTC