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

Re: [All] edits, please review

From: Tadej Stajner <tadej.stajner@ijs.si>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:55:40 +0100
Message-ID: <50A34E7C.3090004@ijs.si>
To: joerg@bioloom.de
CC: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>, public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Hi, Jörg,
things are now easier to read. I got stuck on one part:

     Disambiguation for target type class, which *explicitly* describes 
the type class of the underlying concept or entity of the fragment.

     Disambiguation for target identity, which *implicitly* describes 
the intended meaning of the fragment through a link to an external resource.

I'm not sure what's the intention behind the implicit/explicit 
differentiation. I interpret both as explicit markers - one of type, the 
other of identity.

Also, both are in essence 'links to external resource'. @Felix, I 
suggest the following wording:

  *

    Disambiguation for target type class, a link to an external resource
    that describes the type class of the underlying concept or entity,
    mentioned in the fragment.

  *

    Disambiguation for target identity, a link to an external resource
    that describes the intended meaning of the fragment.



-- Tadej


On 11/13/2012 5:40 PM, Jörg Schütz wrote:
> Hi Felix,
>
> Got your message, and here is some rework of the Disambiguation 
> section. I hope that I kept your spirit... ;-)
>
> Cheers -- Jörg
>
> On Nov 13, 2012 at 16:07 (CET), Felix Sasaki wrote:
>> Thanks, Dave, for bringing these up (again). Look all good, I'll try to
>> implement these on the plane. Still I hope that we will get feedback
>> from others too, esp. about Disambiguation - here I made most of 
>> changes.
>>
>> - Felix
>>
>> 2012/11/13 Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie 
>> <mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>>
>>
>>     Felix,
>>
>>     haven't caught up with these latest changes, but some comments on
>>     some of the older ones - but ignore them if they are not helpful.
>>
>>     - 1.5 out of scope
>>     Yves, Arle and others may have a clearer view on this, but rather
>>     than just referring to 'Localization parameters' or 'localization
>>     properties', it would be clearer to refer to 'localization _project_
>>     parameters' or 'localization _project_ properties.
>>
>>     - 1.6 important design principles
>>     [minor point] you state "needed for the internationalization and
>>     localization of XML schemas and documents and HTML5 documents", but
>>     though schema play a role in the process, we don't literally deal
>>     with localization of schema (apart from treating an xsd doc as any
>>     other xml doc). so i suggest dropping the inclusion of schema in
>>     this sentence.
>>
>>     [minor wording suggestion] - change; "For ITS markup that appears in
>>     an XML instance, which XML nodes the ITS-related information
>>     pertains to must be clearly defined."
>>     to "For ITS markup that appears in an XML instance, *the XML nodes
>>     to which the ITS-related information pertains must be clearly 
>> defined.*"
>>
>>     [minor improvement suggestion] under ease of integration, where you
>>     discuss fitting into the W3C architecture you could add
>>     "e.g. use of[XPath 1.0]
>> <http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#xpath>for
>>     the selection mechanism *and use of IRI's as references to relevant
>>     external resources*"
>>
>>     5.5 Precedence between selections
>>
>>     for the note about precedence, should this also refer to override of
>>     global information by local information and of local information by
>>     local information in a more immediate ancestor? current it just
>>     mentions 'rule elements'
>>
>>     1.1.1 Relationship to ITS1.0
>>
>>     [really minor - to improve clarity] We have the bullet: "Where ITS
>>     1.0 data categories are implemented in XML, the implementation must
>>     be conformant with the ITS 1.0 approach to XML to claim conformance
>>     to ITS 2.0."
>>
>>     Though this is factually true, since we now include all the details
>>     from ITS1.0 in ITS2.0 its perhaps redundant here as a statement
>>     about conformance. It might then avoid people mistakenly seeking the
>>     ITS1.0 test suite to claim ITS2.0 conformance.
>>
>>     cheers,
>>     Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 12/11/2012 23:12, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>>>     Hi all,
>>>
>>>     I did a lot of edits, see
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#changelog-since-20121023
>>>
>>>     change 6-12.
>>>
>>>     Tadej, can you esp. review the global rules change? See change 10
>>>     and 11.
>>>
>>>     For all, then you write comments, please use mails with the action
>>>     item numbers mentioned in the change log.
>>>
>>>     Thanks,
>>>
>>>     Felix
>>>
>>>     --
>>>     Felix Sasaki
>>>     DFKI / W3C Fellow
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Felix Sasaki
>> DFKI / W3C Fellow
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2012 07:56:24 UTC

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