RE: [DPUB-ANNOTATION-UC] Comment on title or on publication? [I18N-ISSUE-457]

Hi Rob,

I wouldn’t republish the document for that purpose. You might consider it for errata or for a future revision (if any).

Addison

From: Robert Sanderson [mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 2:13 AM
To: Phillips, Addison
Cc: public-digipub@w3.org; public-i18n-core@w3.org; Web Annotation
Subject: Re: [DPUB-ANNOTATION-UC] Comment on title or on publication? [I18N-ISSUE-457]


Thanks Addison!

In the DPUB use case document for 2.1.1, "title" is intended to mean the publication work, rather than a particular document or the title string.  I agree that the polysemy here is undesirable, as that particular usage is probably limited to the library and publishing industry.

At this stage (given that it is already published as a note) I'm not sure if it's worth changing to remove a single word?

Rob


On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com<mailto:addison@lab126.com>> wrote:
Hello Dpub,

Here is the third and last comment.

Description:
    http://www.w3.org/TR/dpub-annotation-uc/


    2.1.1 Comment on title or on publication?

    The title of this use case suggests that the comment is on the title string. But the body of the use case is about commentary associated with the publication itself. In addition, it is worth noting that even electronic editions of a publication can have multiple versions. [this last is later discussed to some degree in 2.3.2]

Regards (for I18N),

Addison

[1] https://www.w3.org/International/track/issues/457


Addison Phillips
Principal SDE, I18N Architect (Amazon)
Chair (W3C I18N WG)

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.



--
Rob Sanderson
Information Standards Advocate
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305