Re: [jlreq] Japanese Script Resources page (#438)

> What is the distinction between jlreq/jlreq-d, j-lreq, [Japanese Script Resources page](https://w3c.github.io/jlreq/jpan/), and [your document](https://r12a.github.io/scripts/jpan/ja)? I am a bit confused.

[Japanese Script Resources page](https://w3c.github.io/jlreq/jpan/) (which will have the short name jpan-lreq, although the short names are not particularly important) provides people creating gap reports and provides implementers with a way to find resources such as GH discussions, tests, type samples, etc related to a particular topic.  The structure of the document is consistent across script resource docs for all scripts, and all relevant repositories use labels that conform to that structure).

In addition, the Japanese Script Resources page points to useful sources of information about how a script works, requirements, etc.  

If the [existing JLReq](https://www.w3.org/TR/jlreq/) contains any such information for a given topic, it is linked to first.

As other documents are published by the jlreq group, they will also be pointed to.  This will include jlreq-d, when there is something to point to.

I usually only add a pointer to [my orthography notes document](https://r12a.github.io/scripts/jpan/ja) if i think it contains some information that might be useful but that is not included in jlreq.


> I agree that having some common structure between documents for different scripts is beneficial. At the same time, there might be cases where a one-size-fits-all structure does not work well and requires adjustments. I am happy to work with you to explore a better common structure.

The structure of the _Script Resources pages_ will need to be the same as they are currently, since there is a strong link between the structure of various items, including the Script Resources document, the gap analysis document, the Language Matrix, the (work in progress) Language Enablement Index, and the labels for language enablement spread through many repositories.  We have tooling that relies on these mappings to make it easier to maintain and build cross-references into the pages.

However, it's not essential that pages linked to under the Requirements heading (ie. JLReq and JLReq-D) have the same structure.  I don't think we'd want to change the structure of the existing JLReq, but i thought it might be worth considering using the standard structure for JLReq-D, since it helps people find things, and also it tends to show up gaps in coverage. (It also makes it easier to link to requirements, since it tends to keep related information together so that a single link will often suffice; and keeping related information from spreading around the document also makes it easier to find information when reading that document.)

Wrt one-size-fits-all, if we were indeed to use this structure for JLReq-D we could make some tweaks if needed, since the requirements documents don't need to follow the rigid structure of the other documents mentioned earlier. However, you may have spotted that the structure is the same as that which i use for parts of my own orthography notes.  I have been developing and refining this classification to describe many, very varied orthographies (currently 89 - see https://r12a.github.io/scripts/index.html#scriptnotes), and have done so over many years now, and it works quite well. (Which is why Fuqiao and i decided to use it for the W3C materials too.)

> Is the proposed common structure described somewhere, or is it best to look at examples such as a-lreq?

There's a template i use to create new Script Resources docs at https://w3c.github.io/i18n-activity/templates/lreq_doc/lreq_template.html    It has the full set of headings (some of which are dropped if not relevant, eg. Cursive Text), and it has short italicised paragraphs beneath each heading that give an idea of what's included in each section.  That gives an idea of what the basic skeleton might be.

The organisation of material within those headings is whatever works best for the language in question.  

Btw, fwiw, one area that i find can often be improved by a clearer separation of ideas is that of text alignment/justification vs. text spacing. If you're interested, you can see how i broke out ideas related to text spacing (as opposed to justification) in my orthography notes at https://r12a.github.io/scripts/jpan/ja.html#letterspace. 

Does that help?

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by r12a
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/jlreq/issues/438#issuecomment-2247356510 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2024 09:28:50 UTC