[i18n-activity] "localizable members" should be separately defined (#1703)

aphillips has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity:

== "localizable members" should be separately defined ==
## Proposed comment

`dir` member
https://w3c.github.io/manifest/#dir-member

> The localizable members are:
> 
>    [name](https://w3c.github.io/manifest/#dfn-name) member.
>    [short_name](https://w3c.github.io/manifest/#dfn-short_name) member.
>    [Shortcut item's](https://w3c.github.io/manifest/#dfn-shortcut-item) [name](https://w3c.github.io/manifest/#dfn-name-0) member.
>    [Shortcut item's](https://w3c.github.io/manifest/#dfn-shortcut-item) [short_name](https://w3c.github.io/manifest/#dfn-short_name-0) member.
>    [Shortcut item's](https://w3c.github.io/manifest/#dfn-shortcut-item) [description](https://w3c.github.io/manifest/#dfn-description) member.

The section about the `dir` member defines the term "localizable member" and includes the above definition of which fields are localizable. It seems like "localizable" should be defined separately so that it can be referred to by various members and sub-members as appropriate and so that the list of items belonging to it doesn't inadvertently become stale.

I'll add that "localization" encompasses more than just translation of strings. It can and often does include changing other items found in a manifest, such as icons, colors, and such. The textual items are important, of course, and are related to direction and language metadata more directly than (say) an icon, but this shouldn't be overlooked.


## Instructions: 

This follows the process at https://w3c.github.io/i18n-activity/guidelines/review-instructions.html

1. Create the review comment you want to propose by replacing the prompts above these instructions, but **LEAVE ALL THE INSTRUCTIONS INTACT** 

2. **Add one or more t:... labels. These should use ids from specdev establish a link to that doc.**

2. Set a label to identify the spec: this starts with s: followed by the spec's short name. If you are unable to do that, ask a W3C staff contact to help.

3. Ask the i18n WG to review your comment.

4. After discussion with the i18n WG, raise an issue in the repository of the WG that owns the spec. Use the text above these instructions as the starting point for that comment, but add any suggestions that arose from the i18n WG. In the other WG's repo, add an 'i18n-needs-resolution' label to the new issue. If you think any of the participants in layout requirements task force groups would be interested in following the discussion, add also the appropriate i18n-\*lreq label(s).

5. Delete the text below that says 'url_for_the_issue_raised', then add in its place the URL for the issue you raised in the other WG's repository. Do NOT remove the initial '§ '. Do NOT use \[...](...) notation – you need to delete the placeholder, then paste the URL.

6. Remove the 'pending' label, and add a 'needs-resolution' tag to this tracker issue. 

7. If you added an \*lreq label, add the label 'spec-type-issue', add the corresponding language label, and a label to indicate the relevant typographic feature(s), eg. 'i:line_breaking'. The latter represent categories related to the Language Enablement Index, and all start with i:.

8. Edit this issue to **REMOVE ALL THE INSTRUCTIONS & THE PROPOSED COMMENT**, ie. the line below that is '---' and all the text before it to the very start of the issue.

---


**This is a tracker issue.** Only discuss things here if they are i18n WG internal meta-discussions about the issue. **Contribute to the actual discussion at the following link:**


§ url_for_the_issue_raised


Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/1703 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Monday, 8 May 2023 14:53:59 UTC