- From: Yves Savourel <yves@opentag.com>
- Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 16:12:39 -0600
- To: <public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org>
Hi all, > I've cretated a Wiki page > http://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/ITS_Simplified_XPath > linked from > http://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/ITS_Processing > Which contains a proposal for a simplified EBNF. Asgeir or others: > Could you see if it fits your needs, and edit the page accordingly? > If you have problems with the Wiki account please tell me. Would this simplified notation be still in line with the requirement that 'pointer' attributes must be relative? See second bullet in section 5.2.1 of the ITS spec: <http://www.w3.org/TR/its/#selection-global> "Attributes that point to existing information in the document, i.e. attributes whose name ends in ...Pointer, MUST use a RelativeLocationPath as described in XPath 1.0 or its successor. The XPath expression is evaluated relative to the nodes selected by the selector attribute. The following attributes point to existing information: locNotePointer, locNoteRefPointer, termInfoPointer, termInfoRefPointer, rubyPointer, rtPointer, rpPointer, rbcPointer, rtcPointer, rbspanPointer, langPointer." At a first glance it seems it does not (but I may read the EBNF incorrectly). If it is the case, such notation may be OK with the 'selector' attributes, but may not be always enough for the 'pointer' attributes. Cheers, -yves
Received on Saturday, 14 June 2008 22:12:29 UTC