W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: [widgets] localizing author

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 12:02:53 +0200
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D0AC699922CB4767B19E2F16780C5681@gmail.com>

On Thursday, May 5, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: 
> On Wed, 04 May 2011 18:29:50 +0200, Marcos Caceres
> <marcosscaceres@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I just realised that I actually localise my own name...
> > > But I cannot do that in config.xml. Likewise, I would
> > > like to localise the href for me which would be possible if I could
> > > localise the author element but isn't at the moment.
> > 
> > Yes, this was a mistake.
> 
> If we were at REC I would suggest this go into an erratum...

Although it seems like a small thing, it's a significant change to the parsing model for this kind of element. And if we change it for author, we should also change it for <icon> too. 

> 
> > > I don't know if this is too late for the current version, in which case
> > > please log it as an issue for the future.
> > 
> > I think it is too late for this version. We have runtimes now at 99% and 
> > even 100% conformance and adding this would make most runtimes 
> > non-conforming. I think its more important now to push this spec to REC 
> > and address these kinds of cases in a future version of the spec.
> 
> Do we have a test for this? I propose that we allow our run-time (and 
> other implementations, such as the validation used by Opera stores) to 
> localise author, and if that makes us non-conforming we're letting good be 
> an enemy of better (and the argument that we have conformant run-times 
> then looks weaker). If we don't have a test for it, then we know there is 
> a requirement in our spec that isn't tested anyway.

There are no tests that combine xml:lang and the author element - so I think you are in the clear wrt conformance (this also means that spec is in the clear to allow this feature to be added later). So, :D. There are tests to make sure that only the first author element in document order encountered is selected:

http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/test-suite/#user-agent/ta-LYLMhryBBT/tests

So, adding the behavior you are proposing could keep Opera conforming for the purpose of the test suite: when <author> elements with no xml:lang are present in a config.xml, behave as the spec says today. Otherwise, behave as if <author> was localizable via xml:lang. 

> 
> In paticular, since we have at least one live product (addons.opera.com 
> submission process) that validates against the existing schema, we have 
> the choice of either supporting the spec or supporting best practice here. 
> What would you prefer us to do?
If I could have one wish, I wish Opera would first claim 100% conformance by fixing the empty <name> element bug. Then, after that, we create a new spec that makes both <author> (and <icon>!) localizable via xml:lang. Existing content will continue work with the introduction of this new behavior and can even be kept backwards compatible with existing runtimes if a few simple rules are followed during authoring. However, if you can get both implemented in a timely manner, that's also a huge win for authors.

> 
> > > Changing it to allow localisation would mean a change to the schema -
> > > and at least to Opera's implementation. I haven't yet checked (I only
> > > realised I want to do this but it isn't allowed today) whether we have
> > > any preference for making that change now or later.
> > 
> > I think we should definitely add this to any future versions of the 
> > spec. In fact, authors could actually start using multiple localized 
> > author elements today and have them work in the future.
> > 
> > If it is ok with you, we will add this to a future version of the spec?
> 
> Notwithstanding the above, given that if you do add localised versions the 
> required behaviour is clear in v1
> processing, I can live with that if the group decides to take that 
> approach.
> 
> Pity though. Turns out we're not infallible yet ;)
It's amazing the things one finds when people actually start using stuff we specify :) 
Received on Thursday, 5 May 2011 10:03:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:45 GMT