- From: Ryukeikun via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 03:41:26 +0000
- To: public-i18n-archive@w3.org
The point @realfish talking about is the structure of this section, and the point @acli talking about is about usage of new terms, both of which are already a little away from original purpose of this issue. Anyway, what I could say is, current CLReq structure is made base on JLReq, while JLReq structure is base on JIS X 4051. As a matter of fact, first-line indent is quite more frequent and important (which can be seen in almost every document) than paragraph-indent (which can mostly only be seen for quotation), that is the reason both of these 2 Japanese document state deal with it firstly. For CLReq, there is no necessary to match every section with JLReq. What we only need to discuss is, whether to make the structure of this document according to usage frequency (as Japanese ones) or more logical structure (as @realfish advised). And about the usage of new terms, as my personally opinion, we should try to avoid make/use new terms as much as we can, especially in such a _requirement_ document. What we need to do in this document is, e.g. showing there is a term called "hanging indent" in publishing world (“professional design language”) and explain it to engineers and technicians, instead of making a term such as "outdent/dedent". However, some issues that @acli mentioned are not in this case but for the translation. _Line head/end indent_ maybe a little odd in English, but they are easy to understand and used simply as translation of Japanese terms of 字下げ/字上げ , which are considered necessary when JLReq is written. -- GitHub Notification of comment by ryukeikun Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/clreq/issues/387#issuecomment-921430886 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 17 September 2021 03:41:28 UTC