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

RE: [ACTION-262] Two issues

From: Pedro L. Díez Orzas <pedro.diez@linguaserve.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:41:24 +0100
To: "'Arle Lommel'" <arle.lommel@dfki.de>, "'Multilingual Web LT Public List Public List'" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <072901cdc71c$59cbc2b0$0d634810$@linguaserve.com>
Dear Arle, 

 

It is fine to me. I do not know if Karl and Mauricio agree.

All the best,

Pedro

 

De: Arle Lommel [mailto:arle.lommel@dfki.de] 
Enviado el: martes, 20 de noviembre de 2012 10:31
Para: Multilingual Web LT Public List Public List
Asunto: [ACTION-262] Two issues

 

Hi all,

 

In working with Pedro's text, I realized that it actually addresses two
related but distinct issues:

 

1. That you shouldn't use Allowed Characters to try to exclude HTML mark-up
and that this data category should not be "abused" to exclude HTML content.

 

2. That we don't have any way to apply data categories within plain text
content and that there may be ways to work around this issue.

 

#1 clearly belongs in Allowed Characters. I've gone ahead and added that bit
(essentially an edited version of Pedro's first paragraph).

 

#2 is a general issue that is not specific to this category and, I think,
should be placed elsewhere. This is really implementation guidance that
could be quite important in setting the scope of what ITS 2.0 can and cannot
do:

 

For content fields which allow only plain text content, the current ITS 2.0
data categories can by applied only globally, and not with local attributes.
This issue should be addressed in another way external to the ITS 2.0
standard. While prescribing methods to address this issue is beyond the
scope of this specification, one possible way would be to allow markup in
fields where possible and, where allowing HTML is not possible, to use an
extra field that allows HTML input and then create a plain text version from
that input for use where needed.

 

I see why they were connected in what Pedro did, but I believe they need to
be separated.

 

Any suggestion where the second bit should go?

 

-Arle

 

On 2012 Nov 6, at 18:34 , Pedro L. Díez Orzas <pedro.diez@linguaserve.com>
wrote:





Dear all,

 

I send you the text. If you agree, you can close the action 262.

 

«Allowed characters is not intended to disallow HTML markup. The purpose is
to restrict the content to various characters only, like when the content is
used for URL or filename generation. In most of the
Web-Content-Management-Systems content is divided into several fields. Some
fields are restricted to plain text, while in other fields HTML fragments
are allowed.

For fields which only allow plain text, the current ITS 2.0 data categories
can only applied globally and not with local attributes. This issue should
be addressed in another way, apart from the ITS 2.0 standard. One way would
be to allow HTML in these fields if possible, or using an extra field which
allows HTML input and save the plain text of this extra field in the plain
text field.»




All the best,

Pedro

 
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2012 12:41:52 UTC

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