W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: Language tag education and negotiation

From: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 11:28:31 -0700
Message-ID: <30b660a20805061128y22786fb0k742b135f621fd188@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Christophe Strobbe" <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
Cc: www-international@w3.org
I don't disagree with that; I was just talking about the general point that
someone raised earlier.

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Christophe Strobbe <
christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be> wrote:

>
> Hi Mark,
>
> At 16:47 6/05/2008, Mark Davis wrote:
>
> > I'd suspect the issue is not whether it is a translation (there are good
> > and bad translations), but whether it is of the same quality. That is, often
> > the non-main language material can be worse because
> >   * it is a bad translation, or
> >   * it is not kept up to date, or
> >   * it is not complete.
> >
> I understand the difference, but one has to start with something.
> My point was that it is probably unnecessary to strain language-tagging
> mechanisms for the identification of translations or original versions
> because other metadata mechanisms are also available.
> Neither language tagging nor Dublin Core metadata currently address the
> (relative) quality of resources, unless I have overlooked something.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Christophe
>
>
>  On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 6:49 AM, Christophe Strobbe <<mailto:
> > christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >  At 17:16 28/04/2008, John Cowan wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Asmus Freytag scripsit:
> > > >
> > > > > There are parts of the planets where it is common for people to
> > command
> > > > > more than one language.
> > > >
> > > > Most of it, indeed.
> > > >
> > > > > Of course, a meta tag that (reliably :-) ) described something as
> > > > > 'translation', or conversely as 'official language version' would
> > be
> > > > > useful, too.
> > > >
> > > > This would be a good use case for a BCP 47 registered extension,
> > > > something like 't-*' to report the translation status of a document.
> > > > Off the top of my head, the obvious candidates would be t-original,
> > > > t-authentic (for documents which are "equally authentic" in all
> > language
> > > > versions), t-polished, t-rough, and t-machine.
> > > >
> > >
> > >  Maybe this should be covered by Dublin Core metadata elements instead
> > of
> > > just "language tags".
> > >  "Using Dublin Core - The Elements"
> > > <<http://dublincore.org/documents/usageguide/elements.shtml>
> > http://dublincore.org/documents/usageguide/elements.shtml> has element
> > > refinements (for the Relation element) such as "IsBasisFor" and
> > "IsBasedOn",
> > > which could be used for this.
> > >
> > >  The "DCMI Government-Application Profile"
> > > <<http://dublincore.org/groups/government/profile-200111.shtml>
> > http://dublincore.org/groups/government/profile-200111.shtml> also lists
> > > the following element refinements:
> > >  - isBasedOn: The resource is a performance, production, derivation,
> > > translation, adaptation or interpretation of another resource.
> > >  - isBasisOf: The resource has a performance, production, derivation,
> > > translation, adaptation or interpretation, namely, the referenced
> > resource.
> > >  (Note that this document says "isBasisOf" instead of "isBasisFor"; I
> > > haven't found more "authoritative"/up-to-date versions of these
> > documents.)
> > >
> > >  Best regards,
> > >
> > >  Christophe Strobbe
> >
> > --
> > Mark
> >
>
> ---
> Please don't invite me to LinkedIn, Facebook, Quechup or other "social
> networks". You may have agreed to their "privacy policy", but I haven't.
>
> --
> Christophe Strobbe
> K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD
> Research Group on Document Architectures
> Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442
> B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
> BELGIUM
> tel: +32 16 32 85 51
> http://www.docarch.be/
>
> Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
>
>
>


-- 
Mark
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2008 18:29:11 GMT

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