W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > December 2012

RE: [All] its-tool-ref vs. its-tools-ref

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 05:51:47 -0700
To: <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <assp.06829b44e3.assp.068277ff17.000c01cdcfc2$9fbcfba0$df36f2e0$@com>
Hi all,

What bugs me in toolRef/revToolRef and toolsRef is that Provenance's toolRef is doing basically the same thing as toolsRef. And that provenance can also use toolsRef: this is bound to be confusing.

I understand that we selected that that specific data category needed to allow for two tool's references: toolRef and revToolRef.

Maybe another solution would be to allow the main toolsRef to be set for two types of provenance, something like:

toolsRef="provenance|uri1 provenance-ref|uri2"

Then the breach on the general pattern of using toolsRef to specify the tools would be less than having a whole data category define its own way.

cheers,
-yves


-----Original Message-----
From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] 
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 4:33 AM
To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Subject: [All] its-tool-ref vs. its-tools-ref

Hi all,

while working on

http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#list-of-elements-and-attributes

I realized that the provenance "reference to tools" attribute is very similar to the its tool annotation attribute:

- in provenance: its-tool-ref or its:toolRef
- for ITS annotation: its-tools-ref or its:toolsRef

I think we should rename its-tools-ref (that is the annotation
mechanism) including the XML counterpart its:toolsRef) to avoid confusion. Since that is a normative change we should get this done on Monday before the call. Any suggestions?

- Felix
Received on Saturday, 1 December 2012 12:52:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 9 June 2013 00:25:03 UTC