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>
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