Re: Possible wording for acknowledged but yet uncovered requirement related to non-textual content

Hi Christian, all,

Lieske, Christian wrote:
> Hi Felix,
> 
> I promised to send this during today's conference call. It combines
> stuff from my original mail, and some of Felix' feedback. I am not sure
> at all wrt. the correct wording for the last sentence.
> 
> Best regards,
> Christian
> ---
> In certain cases, it is necessary to attach ITS information to element
> or attribute nodes (as opposed to text nodes). An information architect
> may for example have to express that all images (which in his XML
> vocabulary are referenced via an "src" attribute on an "img" element)
> have to be localized (since they for example are only valid for a
> certain culture). 
> 
> From the point of view of ITS selection, this requirement poses a
> challenge since the default selection of the ITS data categories and the
> use of XPath do not cater for the attachment mechanism that is needed.
> Furthermore, it requires specific thoughts related to precedence and
> inheritance.
> 
> The ITS Working Group intend to discuss appropriate mechanisms.

What you wrote is worded very similar to the other requirements in the
requirements document, see http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-itsreq-20051122/
. How about putting your paragraph into that document? At
http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#introduction
, we have a link to requirements which are not addressed yet.

I would strongly disagree with putting that text, namely about a
not-addressed requirement, in the last call draft. There are many people
who will just beat us up saying "what is your concept of last call"?

Regards, Felix.