W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Comment on ITS 2.0 specification WD, i18n-ISSUE-213: its-term in example 44

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:26:57 +0100
Message-ID: <50F7B5D1.9060605@w3.org>
To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
CC: public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org, www International <www-international@w3.org>
Hi Richard, all,

as Mārcis wrote in his reply and as we discussed during yesterday's i18n 
call, HTML "dfn" has quite some ambiguity. For ITS implementations, the 
main point is this: the "its-term" attribute has the same semantics like 
its counterpart for XML content (its:term); an ITS processor will 
recognize "its-term" in HTML5, but won't know anything about "dfn" or 
"dt". And we don't want to change that behaviour with regards to "dfn" 
or "dt", due to reasons you summarized at

Would it resolve your comment if we handle it together with
"i18n-ISSUE-212: HTML5 in the ITS spec"
and to add explanatory text like the above to the example?

I'd encourage others to look into the i18n-ISSUE-212 issue too - it's 
quite important for getting the "ITS + HTML message" across.



Am 16.01.13 20:43, schrieb Richard Ishida:
> Example 44: The Terminology data category expressed locally in HTML
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#terminology-implementation
> This example seems to be recommending use of its-term in HTML5, 
> whereas there are other more standard ways of idnentifying terms in 
> HTML5, eg. using dfn. I don't think this is a useful example (unless 
> it gets heavily qualified by additional text - but even then, i'm 
> doubtful.)
> [comment not discussed by i18n WG]
Received on Thursday, 17 January 2013 08:27:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:04:32 UTC