W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > January to March 1998

QA of HTML 4.0 translations

From: Misha Wolf <misha.wolf@reuters.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 15:31:02 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <B0001259683@ritig7.rit.reuters.com>
To: HTML Editor <www-html-editor@w3.org>, w3c html wg <w3c-html-wg@w3.org>
Which is the appropriate mailing list for this subject?  Is the w3c-html-wg 
list now closed?

I'm somewhat concerned at having seen no QA criteria regarding translations 
of the HTML 4.0 specification.  Presumably, any links to such translations 
will carry a W3C disclaimer regarding the correctness of the translation.  
Hence, I'm not too worried about that aspect.

There are, however, other aspects where bad examples could easily be set by 
such translations.  I have in mind the possible abuse of HTML and of the HTML 
spec at a lower level than the visible text and am thinking of issues such as:

   -  the use of illegal or incorrect language codes or their omission,

   -  the use of illegal or incorrect meta charset tags or their omission,

   -  the use of illegal or incorrect bidi constructs or their omission,

   -  the use of illegal or incorrect NCRs or entity names.

Some of these errors could be caught by automated scripts.  Has any thought 
been given to producing such scripts or to other QA measures?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Misha Wolf            Email: misha.wolf@reuters.com      85 Fleet Street
  Standards Manager     Voice: +44 171 542 6722            London EC4P 4AJ
  Reuters Limited       Fax  : +44 171 542 8314            UK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
12th International Unicode Conference, 8-10 Apr 1998, Tokyo, www.unicode.org
   7th World Wide Web Conference, 14-18 Apr 1998, Brisbane, www7.conf.au



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual  sender,
except  where  the  sender  specifically  states them to be the views of
Reuters Ltd.
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 1998 10:37:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:43 GMT