W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: I18n recharter should address localizability

From: Sue Ellen Wright <sewright@neo.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 13:45:38 -0400
Message-ID: <001401c46b5c$b54ca980$0c02a8c0@Bichette>
To: "Yves Savourel" <ysavourel@translate.com>, <aphillips@webmethods.com>, "'Tex Texin'" <tex@xencraft.com>, <www-international@w3.org>

The notion of a common namespace for localization directives is intriguing.
One of the things on the OSCAR wishlist is to establish namespaceS for TMX,
for XLIFF, for TBX, etc. This would certainly be one way to get groups (and
potentially solutions) to talk to each other.

Sue Ellen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yves Savourel" <ysavourel@translate.com>
To: <aphillips@webmethods.com>; "'Sue Ellen Wright'" <sewright@neo.rr.com>;
"'Tex Texin'" <tex@xencraft.com>; <www-international@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 12:22 PM
Subject: RE: I18n recharter should address localizability


> > 1. What is the nature of the deliverables? To put something in a
> > charter, we need to know exactly what the working group would deliver.
>
> I can think of one possible deliverable: a namespace for localization
> directives. But I'm not sure exactly where it belongs, since it seems to
be
> between "localizability of W3C technologies" (such as XHTML or XML) and
> "localization technologies" (like TMX, XLIFF, etc.).
>
> [In a few words: Localization directives are information inside a document
> that helps the localization process, for example identifying run of text
not
> to be translated, marking up "terms", etc.
> Having a common namespace for this could lead to more control by the
> authors/developer of the source material on how the localization is done.
> For example, one can imagine any authoring application using XML has
> repository to provide a function to markup not-translatable parts the same
> way you can apply a character style. And all localization tools being able
> to take advantage of it.]
>
> While this certainly does not replace following guidelines in creating
> localizable document types, it still is an important part of creating
> documents that are more easily localizable.
>
> So, I'm not sure where such specification should be done, but seems to be
a
> possible deliverable for the W3C. And if the W3C would decide not to take
on
> this task, it would also be helpful as this would make clear another group
> has to do it then.
>
> As far as participation, I can't be sure, but from the level of interest
I'm
> seen for such namespace in various companies, I would guess such work
would
> find some volonteers.
>
> -yves
>
> Yves Savourel
> ENLASO Corporation
> http://www.translate.com
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 16 July 2004 13:45:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:17:03 GMT