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

RE: [Provenance data catgory update, please review]

From: Pablo Nieto Caride <pablo.nieto@linguaserve.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 13:11:17 +0100
To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>, <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <12dd01cdc7e1$4f6858e0$ee390aa0$@linguaserve.com>
Hi Felix, all,

Thanks Felix, I think it's all clearer now. Just a few comments:
1) In the first paragraph of the definition there is a misprint: The
Provenance data category is used to communicate the identity of agents that
have been involved in the translation of the content or the revision of the
translated contend. 
The last word contend, should be content I presume.
2) Another misprint, in the first note: The specification does not define
the format of external provenance data, but it is recommended that an open
provenance or or change logging format be used, e.g. the W3C provenance data
model [PROV-DM].
There is a repeated or "provenance or or change "
3) Another one "Organizational provenance information specified by exactly
of the following:" should be "Organizational provenance information
specified by exactly one of the following:", the "one" is missing.
4) The same happens with "Organizational revision translation related
provenance information specified by exactly of the following:" should be
"Organizational revision translation related provenance information
specified by exactly one of the following:"
	4.1) At this point in the revOrgRefPointer attribute says "A
revOrgRefPointer attribute that contains a relative selector pointing to a
node that contains an IRI referring to a resource that identifies an
organization acting as a translation revison agent." revison agent, should
be revision agent.
5) The editor's note [Ed. note: Below note is taken from the quality issue
data category. Same question applies: Why should below only say "do not
apply to HMTL as local markup"? There is local markup for direct annotation
in XML too.] does not exist in LQI anymore, should happen the same here? Is
necessary to add XML too?
6) Finally I would add the same note Yves added to LQI: In HTML5 the
standoff markup MUST be stored inside a script element with its id attribute
that MUST be set to the same value as the xml:id attribute of the
locQualityIssues element it contains.
Something like this: : In HTML5 the standoff markup MUST be stored inside a
script element with its id attribute that MUST be set to the same value as
the xml:id attribute of the provenanceRecords element it contains.

Regarding the examples, I see them ok. I imagine in the Test Suite there
will be more depending on the features, as I said I would like to help to
revise them and even to make up new ones if you want.

Cheers,
Pablo.
--------
Hi all,

I did action-316 which was the final tweak for the provenance data category
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#d
atacategories-overview
Dave has action-315 to re-work one example, but that won't change the
definition.

Phil and Pablo, I think you will implement provenance? Can you review the
provenance section and check if the definitions work for you? Having your
feedback before next week's call would be great. Other feedback is of course
welcome too :)

Thanks,

Felix
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2012 12:11:45 UTC

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