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

Re: [ACTION-256]: Compile and circulate itsTool examples togehter with proposal text

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 19:51:43 +0100
Message-ID: <CAL58czrCMk2_c6DvB1qQi=bLOS-E8zG1a8Qay0fK99H8k95SRQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Hi Yves,

2012/11/7 Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>

> Hi all,
> > which can be in the same file or in external file,
> > you would encode everything into single URL:
> > its:toolsRef="MTConfidence|
> http://mymt.org/toolinfo?version=456&value=FR-to-EN-General"
> I'm looking at the current draft for MT Confidence and I'm not sure I
> understand why mtConfidenceScore is not defined either in the global rule
> or as local attribute. But maybe that's a moot point.
> My understanding is that now MT Confidence would have:
> Global:
> - a required selector
> - a required mtConfidenceScore
> - a required its:toolsRef
> Local:
> - a required mtConfidenceScore
> - a required its:toolsRef
> its:toolsRef would be defined separately, including what parameters it
> must use (version and value).

I have a different understanding about its:toolsRef, which is: we don't
define any parameters. The example Jirka gave at
Jirka referred to the XQuery way of identified collations, see
"deutsch" in the below is an arbitrary URI, *not* a set of parameters:
fn:compare('Strasse', 'Straße', 'deutsch') returns 0 if the collation
identified by the relative URI constructed from the string value "deutsch"
includes provisions that equate "ss" and the (German) character "ß"
("sharp-s"). (Otherwise, the returned value depends on the semantics of
that collation.)

And it is implementation defined how you interpret the URI.

Defining the parameters (version, value, ...) woudl mean that we do the
same as in the "toolInfo" element, but just don't serialize as XML, but as
URI parameters. The problem stays the same: no interop between

- Felix

> And in the MT confidence section we would just define what goes in value.
> Is that what we all have in mind?
> Thanks,
> -yves

Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 18:52:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:08:24 UTC