- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 09:43:42 +0200
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- CC: Pēteris Ņikiforovs <peteris.nikiforovs@tilde.lv>, public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org, Mārcis Pinnis <marcis.pinnis@tilde.lv>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <51933CAE.8030902@w3.org>
Am 15.05.13 09:26, schrieb Silvia Pfeiffer: > > Wouldn't you want to Igor script for your purposes anyway no matter > where it appears? > I agree, that is to say on the ITS 2.0 side: default "within-text=yes" is for http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/dom.html#phrasing-content-1 plus "script" independent of position. MLW-LT folks, what do you think? - Felix > Silvia. > > On 15 May 2013 16:54, "Felix Sasaki" <fsasaki@w3.org > <mailto:fsasaki@w3.org>> wrote: > > Just to give some background for Silvia / the HTML WG about this > topic. > > In ITS 2.0 "Elements Within Text" information > http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#elements-within-text > helps to identify nesting properties of text sequences. This is > needed e.g. for triggering segmentation during extraction of text, > as a preparation for translation / localization: in > <p>This is a <span>test</span></p> > a translator doesn't want to see the content of e.g. "span" > separately extracted from a "p". So "span" is "within-text=yes", > and "p" is "within-text=no". > > In ITS 2.0 we want to align with HTML5 as much as possible with > regards to defaults for "within text". For the defaults we refer to > http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/dom.html#phrasing-content-1 > saying in ITS 2.0 "what is listed here is equal to ITS > within-text=yes". In this way, content authors don't have to set a > lot of "within-text" information explicitly. > > Refering to > phrasing content > works in 99% (e.g. for "span", "em", ...) - but "script" raised > the question that created this thread: "script" is part of > phrasing content in "body", but "script" can also appear in the > head. With what this thread looks like currently, we would assume > that "script" would only be seen as by default "within-text=yes" > when it appears in the body. (Note that one can always override > these defaults with explicit metadata, btw.). > > Best, > > Felix > > Am 15.05.13 08:00, schrieb Mārcis Pinnis: > > Hi All, > > So we can assume that the HTML5 Defaults for ITS 2.0 Elements > Within Text do not affect the head element, right? > > Best regards, > Mārcis ;o) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Silvia Pfeiffer [mailto:silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com > <mailto:silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 5:51 AM > To: Felix Sasaki > Cc: public-html@w3.org <mailto:public-html@w3.org>; > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > <mailto:public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org> > Subject: Re: Question on "phrasing content" definition > > Hi Felix, > > the definition of <head> is here: > http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/document-metadata.html#the-head-element > > It says for its content model: > If the document is an iframe srcdoc document or if title > information is available from a higher-level protocol: Zero or > more elements of metadata content. > Otherwise: One or more elements of metadata content, of which > exactly one is a title element. > > So, the content model is metadata content, which is specified > here: > http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/dom.html#metadata-content > > So, no, <head> elements don't hve phrasing content. > > HTH. > Silvia. > > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:38 AM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org > <mailto:fsasaki@w3.org>> wrote: > > Not sure if anybody from the HTML WG saw this or whether a > different > forum for this question would be better ... anyway, any > advice would > be highly appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Felix > > Am 08.05.13 15:33, schrieb Felix Sasaki: > > Hi, > > a question on > > http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/dom.html#phrasing-content-1 > > does this definition also encompass the content of the > "head" > element, e.g. "script" inside "head"? That is, is > content of <head> > part of intra-paragraph? > > Thanks, > > Felix > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 15 May 2013 07:44:09 UTC