i18n (was: horizontal review)

Thanks for the links, Sandro.

On the i18n topic, I have browsed through the self-review

https://www.w3.org/International/techniques/developing-specs?collapse

I don't see how any of this applies to us. We are defining an RDF 
vocabulary that is used by machines. So all our i18n issues are handled 
(or not) by RDF. Of course every RDF node in a shapes graph may have 
labels in multiple languages, and that language can be explicitly stated 
using the @en tags. In our own TTL file (which is not normative) we use 
@en labels, BTW.

A special mention should probably go to sh:message, which is a mechanism 
to report violations back to users. Our design explicitly allows those 
messages to be in multiple languages. See the sections on sh:message. 
Likewise our own annotation properties sh:name and sh:description.

But most of what SHACL does happens on the server, invisible to users. 
There is also no standardized user interface to SHACL.

Should we just go ahead and contact the I18n group at W3C with this input?

     https://www.w3.org/International/review-request

We really ought to do something about this process requirement soon.

Holger


On 23/02/2017 3:28, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> Overview and guidance on horizontal review: 
> https://www.w3.org/wiki/DocumentReview
>
> Most urgent, I think, would be (under Review Resources > 
> Internationalization): https://www.w3.org/International/review-request
>
> After the Security & Privacy questionnaire is done, and there's a 
> draft Considerations section in the spec, I'd send it to the Security 
> & Privacy folks.
>
> I expect it'll be out-of-scope for a11y, but it's still good form to 
> send it to them for review, as well.
>
>     -- Sandro
>
>

Received on Friday, 24 February 2017 06:21:58 UTC