W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-i18n-comments@w3.org > February 2003

Your comments on the Character Model [C006, C007, C009, C010, C011, C012, C014, C015, C017]

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 14:55:51 -0000
To: <shlomit@mindspring.com>
Cc: <www-i18n-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001f01c2d694$aa9e2530$d901000a@w3c40upc3ma3j2>

Dear Shlomit,

Many thanks for your comments on the 2nd Last Call version of the
Character Model for the World Wide Web v1.0 [1].  We appreciate the
interest you have taken in this specification.

You can see the comments you submitted, grouped together, at 
http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2002/charmod-lc/SortByOriginator.h
tml#C005
(You can jump to a specific comment in the table by adding its ID to the
end of the URI.)

The following comments were accepted and implemented as you suggested.
We do not need you to comment on the edits made, but if you wish to,
please reply to us within the next two weeks at
mailto:www-i18n-comments@w3.org and copy w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org.
        C009, C014, C015, C017


PLEASE REVIEW the decisions for the following additional comments and
reply to us within the next two weeks at mailto:www-i18n-comments@w3.org
(copying w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org) to say whether you are satisfied with the
decision taken. 
        C006, C007, C010, C011, C012

Information relating to these comments is included below. You will
receive notification of decisions on remaining comments at a later date.

You can find the latest version of the Character Model at
http://www.w3.org/International/Group/charmod-edit/ . 

Best regards,
Richard Ishida, for the I18N WG




DECISIONS REQUIRING A RESPONSE
==============================

*****C006 [772]3.1.1 Indic abugidas
     * See also the following comments: [774]C093
     * Comment (received 2002-04-24) -- [775]RE: Request for commitment
       to review Charmod Last Call #2
       See [776]attached file
       "Indic scripts are abugidas. Each ..." ->
       "In Indic abugidas, each ..."
     * Decision: In the examples in 3.1.1, remove definitions such as
       abugida, abjad, etc.
     * Decision: Not Applicable.
     * Rationale for "Not Applicable": We decided to simplify the text
by
       removing definitions such as abugida, abjad, etc.

    [772]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/#sec-PerceptionsIntro
    [775]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/0098.html
    [776]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/att-0098/01-Char
acter_Model_for_the_World_Wide_Web_1_0_--SRF.htm#sec-PerceptionsIntro


*****C007 [778]3.1.1 Hebrew alephbet and Arabic abjad
     * Comment (received 2002-04-24) -- [780]RE: Request for commitment
       to review Charmod Last Call #2
       See [781]attached file
       "Arabic script is an example of an abjad. Short ..." ->
       "In the Hebrew alephbet and the Arabic abjad short ..."
     * Decision: In the examples in 3.1.1, remove definitions such as
       abugida, abjad, etc.
     * Decision: Add a mention of Hebrew.
     * Decision: Partially-accepted.
     * Rationale for "Partially-accepted": We decided to simplify the
       text by removing definitions such as abugida, abjad, etc.

   [778]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/#sec-PerceptionsIntro
    [780]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/0098.html
    [781]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/att-0098/01-Char
acter_Model_for_the_World_Wide_Web_1_0_--SRF.htm#sec-PerceptionsIntro


*****C010 [797]3.1.3 The words are read from right to left
   while the numbers are read from left to right
     * Comment (received 2002-04-24) -- [799]RE: Request for commitment
       to review Charmod Last Call #2
       See [800]attached file
       "Text including characters from these scripts can run in both
       directions and is ..." ->
       "Text including characters from these scripts and numbers run in
       both directions: The words are read from right to left while the
       numbers are read from left to right. This text is ..."
     * Decision: Rejected.
     * Rationale for "Rejected": The proposed text doesn't cover all
       cases (eg numbers using the Hebrew script). The provision of a
       complete explanation would take more time than we have available.

    [797]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/#sec-VisualRenderingUnits
    [799]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/0098.html
    [800]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/att-0098/01-Char
acter_Model_for_the_World_Wide_Web_1_0_--SRF.htm#sec-VisualRenderingUnit
s


*****C011  [802]3.1.3 Change the example of logical
   selection
     * Comment (received 2002-04-24) -- [804]RE: Request for commitment
       to review Charmod Last Call #2
       See [805]attached file
       [T]he above example will be easier to follow if you use a word
       (April rather than March?) that does not include letters whose
       final form differ from their usual form. The reader who cannot
       read Arabic will better see the reversed order that is otherwise
       not so obvious in the current example
     * Decision: Rejected.
     * Rationale for "Rejected": The effort required to change the
       example would be excessive.

    [802]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/#sec-VisualRenderingUnits
    [804]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/0098.html
    [805]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/att-0098/01-Char
acter_Model_for_the_World_Wide_Web_1_0_--SRF.htm#sec-VisualRenderingUnit
s


*****C012 [807]3.2 Discussion of 2nd bullet
     * Comment (received 2002-04-24) -- [809]RE: Request for commitment
       to review Charmod Last Call #2
       See [810]attached file
       The word "mapping" is normally understood as many-to-one or
       one-to-one and is therefore misused here. One can replace it by
       the word "relation" or, better yet, quote Connolly's treatment of
       this subject. Connolly discusses the unintuitive function from
the
       non-negative integers to the repertoire. It is worth including
his
       dicussion here with at least one example in which the mapping is
       not one-to-one. 4.1.1 brings such an example: " For instance ...
       in a Unicode encoding it can be represented as the single
       character U+00E7 '' or the sequence U+0063 'c' U+0327 '', and
in
       HTML it could be additionally represented as &ccedil; or &#xE7;
or
       &#231;". Connolly also uses correctly the words "domain" and
       "range" and his vocabulary rather than a loose use of the word
       "set" should be followed.
     * Decision: Rejected.
     * Rationale for "Rejected": We believe this is based on a
       misunderstanding by the originator. The mapping is one-to-one.

    [807] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/#sec-Digital
    [809]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/0098.html
    [810]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2002Apr/att-0098/01-Char
acter_Model_for_the_World_Wide_Web_1_0_--SRF.htm#sec-Digital




USEFUL LINKS
==============
[1] The version of CharMod you commented on: 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/
[2] Latest editor's version (still being edited): 
http://www.w3.org/International/Group/charmod-edit/
[3] Last Call comments table, sorted by ID: 
http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2002/charmod-lc/


============
Richard Ishida
W3C

tel: +44 1753 480 292
http://www.w3.org/International/ http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
Received on Monday, 17 February 2003 09:56:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:32:32 GMT